I guess some of you have rightly pointed out the "weird"/incongruent laws we have over here. Indeed, I believe we have read occasionally many other newspaper reports through the years that make us go: "Huh, you mean for that, this offender is only going to get a relatively easy 1-2 years imprisonment?" Or for an offence where medical treatment or counselling would have been better, like this fetish case, suddenly it's a heavy sentence with no turning back consequences.
I'm not sure if it's the case of we let we "those up there" rule the place/country so much that whatever happens, it's none of our business anyway and life will still go on as usual tomorrow. But I'm quite certain if this sort of thing happened in some Western countries, there will be huge protests, especially by the human rights groups.
Or if truth be told, that the offender had raped some of the women in the process, then the local papers here are clearly not doing a good job of giving a complete picture of whatever happened. For 18 strokes of the cane, that sounds way too severe for a simple molest case. It's almost equivalent to a robbery/rape offence. But it just doesn't sound right to me that such a severe punishment be meted out on a mentally challenged person.
sentancing a criminal to jail is not only as a form of punishment, but in an ideal case, to reform him so he/she can turn over to a new live.
how than, in this case, by jailing a mental person to jail helps? and can you even imagine the kind of treatment he will get in there? do you think it will be medical assistant?
photography makes one sees things from all angles.
I love to watch justice Bao when i was young. It was amazing how Bao can see through a case by waking up from a dream or with his third eye. Are our judges trained like Bao da ren?
In this case, a supposed mentaly challenged individual was given a stiff sentice and a long jail term. It is either the stupid media is not portraying the case in its entirety or that the judge was emotionally (or externally) influenced into a rash verdict. Or perhaps, the defendant was putting a show and the judge saw thru his tricks in faking an insanity plea (remember the show Primal Fear starred by Richard Gere?)
With all these said, i can only say the following phrase:
Justice is blind. Dont blame it.
1. Generally, there are 2 types of mental problem. First category are those who do abnormal things which do not disturb the community (eg: OCD, compulsive hoarding/collecting trash). The second category are those whose behaviour disturb the community (eg: sexual offenders, those who walks around in a coffee shop taking food from table to table without permission, etc.)
2. For any sexual-related case done by a person with mental problem, most of the time the offender is unable to understand that what he did is wrong, since he/she will only follows his/her animal instinct related to his/her sexuality. Thus, the repeat offender rate is relatively higher than the same case done by someone who have no mental problem. A normal person can be rehabilitated much easily, because he/she can understand that what they did is wrong.
3. If we insist on treatment, which I agree might be successful, there are a high chance that he will do the same offence during the period of his treatment. There might be more victims of his act during his treatment period, and this is not fair to the community.
4. There are a higher chance that the condition is not treatable. The success rate to cure someone with mental problem are almost zero. Until today, there are no one who can be cured 100% from mental problem. What being done is merely controlling the problem, and suppressing behaviours related to his/her mental problem. These behaviours can reappear any time in the future, which translate to more victims.
5. The purpose of justice system is to protect the innocents. Thus, in other word, to separate those who did, doing, and have a tendency to do unlawfull act, from the society.
6. Thus, referring to all the options above, there is no other effective ways of preventing these to happen again except to lock up this guy behind bars. However this might not be the most efficient way of settling the problem.
7. Compassionate should be taking place since this is his first offence. There should be alternatives given to the family of the offender. For example, to refer him back to his family and prohibiting him from wandering around alone. The jail term should be enforced only if the family refuse or unable to carry the responsibility.
My 2 cents.