Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Do you think it's fair?

  1. #1

    Default Do you think it's fair?

    2 different cases:-
    first one, a mentally ill(a person who should be treated) person attacked 3 madrasah girls.verdict was 6 months' jail.
    second one, civil servant lady killed biker at KJE accident.verdict is 3 weeks' jail.only 3 weeks for killing!!
    lesson in Singapore Justice System-next time do not beat up people..just kill as the sentence is lighter.
    Anyone else think this is unfair?

  2. #2

    Default Re: Do you think it's fair?

    The disparity of the punishment feels unfair if we look at the result of the action, loss of life (irreversible) vs injury, but the law also takes into consideration the intent - malice vs negligence.

    You can't really say "next time do not beat up people..just kill as the sentence is lighter", as if that attacker had killed those 3 girls deliberately during his attack, you can be pretty sure he'll be looking at more than 6 months' jail. If there was evidence to show that this biker was specifically targeted and run over by the murderer, my guess is that it would be more than 3 weeks jail, definitely a few years.

    Read this: http://transport.asiaone.com/news/ge...-negligent-act

    SINGAPORE - In the past year, the courts have heard at least four cases of traffic accidents that resulted in death.

    The victims were cyclists, pedestrians and foreign workers at the back of a lorry. One of the victims was knocked down by her boyfriend.

    All the drivers were handed a driving ban ranging from four to eight years, but their sentences were quite different.

    One driver escaped jail time with a fine of $5,000.

    So why the difference in punishment?

    It depends on whether the driver was charged with a rash act or a negligent act.

    The maximum penalty for causing death by a rash act not amounting to homicide is five years in jail, or a fine, or both.

    The penalty for a negligent act is lower, with the jail term capped at two years.

    AWARENESS OF RISK

    Lawyer Edric Pan, a partner in Rodyk & Davidson, said the difference between a rash act and a negligent act is the awareness of risk.

    He said: "In a rash act, the driver must be aware, or ought to be aware, that his actions involve the risk of causing injury or death, but he still runs the risk anyway."

    Mr Pan uses the example of a motorist driving at high speed towards a crowd of people to illustrate a rash act.

    "Although there may have been no intention to cause hurt, any reasonable person would know that his actions would be likely to result in injury or death."

    On the other hand, a negligent act involves a person who did not knowingly take a risk, but did not take reasonable care to prevent the accident, he added.

    Aggravating factors also matter.

    Speeding, driving when over-tired and drink driving would result in a higher sentence, said Mr Pan.

    In May, a court of three judges, led by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, overthrew a longstanding sentencing practice of imposing fines for causing death by negligent driving.

    In a 1993 case, former CJ Yong Pung How ruled that if death was caused by a negligent act, a fine would suffice in most cases.

    But after examining the case of a woman who was charged with negligent driving, the judges ruled that the "default starting position" in the case of a negligent traffic death should be up to four weeks' imprisonment, subject to aggravating or mitigating factors.

    In particular, the presence of aggravating factors would call for a starting point of between two and four months in jail.

    The amount of harm caused would also have to be taken into account.

    In their written judgment, they said: "We would like to take this opportunity to signal to drivers the consequences of the tremendous risks that they take on, not only to themselves but also to other innocent road users, when they drive despite not being in a fit condition to do so."

  3. #3
    Senior Member Nikonzen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    2,544

    Default Re: Do you think it's fair?

    Moot question doesn't matter what anyone thinks the law is the law
    Expand your mind or get left behind

  4. #4
    Moderator Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    12,389

    Default Re: Do you think it's fair?

    Quote Originally Posted by kandinsky View Post
    The disparity of the punishment feels unfair if we look at the result of the action, loss of life (irreversible) vs injury, but the law also takes into consideration the intent - malice vs negligence.
    That's the key and that is what most people forget. Together with Kant's Imperative.
    EOS

  5. #5

    Default Re: Do you think it's fair?

    I came across the following phase while attending a course long time ago:

    Justice is Law, Law is no Justice.

    Took me a long time to comprehend the phase
    Tangfolio, 9mm; CZ75 Shadow, 9mm; S&W 686, .38

  6. #6

    Default Re: Do you think it's fair?

    There are a differences between deliberate and accidental.

    If you cannot tell the differences, you are not qualify to judge whether is it fair or unfair.

    Many bikers drive dangerously in SG, cutting into the lanes of other vehicles like they owned the road. How do you know that the biker, who got killed, are obeying traffic law ?
    If the biker drive dangerously and die, do you think the car owner need to be punish severely ?

    If the mentally unsound man have a good lawyer and prove that he was mentally unsound when he attack the girls, he will be send to mental institute for treatment rather than go to jail.
    Last edited by Yutaka Go; 5th June 2016 at 04:26 PM.
    I eats, shoots & leaves

  7. #7
    Member Bukitimah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,261

    Default Re: Do you think it's fair?

    Read it somewhere which I think is useful to know 'Remembering a wrong is carrying a burden in the mind'.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    188

    Default Re: Do you think it's fair?

    Quote Originally Posted by kandinsky View Post
    The disparity of the punishment feels unfair if we look at the result of the action, loss of life (irreversible) vs injury, but the law also takes into consideration the intent - malice vs negligence.

    You can't really say "next time do not beat up people..just kill as the sentence is lighter", as if that attacker had killed those 3 girls deliberately during his attack, you can be pretty sure he'll be looking at more than 6 months' jail. If there was evidence to show that this biker was specifically targeted and run over by the murderer, my guess is that it would be more than 3 weeks jail, definitely a few years.

    Read this: http://transport.asiaone.com/news/ge...-negligent-act
    What BS!
    Death caused by negligence is tolerable??
    Are you saying it is ok for some human being to die due to the stupidity of another?
    What nonsense!!!

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    188

    Default Re: Do you think it's fair?

    It is ok for someone 's father to die due to another 's negligence of doing proper lift maintenance???
    BS!!

  10. #10
    Moderator Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    12,389

    Default Re: Do you think it's fair?

    Quote Originally Posted by can100D View Post
    What BS!
    Death caused by negligence is tolerable??
    Are you saying it is ok for some human being to die due to the stupidity of another?
    What nonsense!!!
    So in other words: if you drink and drive, causing an accident whereby someone else dies as result, you will accept capital punishment for you as the driver?
    Because death by negligence is not acceptable to you, so it becomes homicide.
    EOS

  11. #11

    Default Re: Do you think it's fair?

    Quote Originally Posted by can100D View Post
    Death caused by negligence is tolerable??
    Are you saying it is ok for some human being to die due to the stupidity of another?
    Where was it implied that it is tolerable or ok?

    No, it's neither tolerable or ok.
    Last edited by kandinsky; 11th June 2016 at 12:03 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •