Passenger Hijacked CityCab And Knocked Down Cleaner At Budget Terminal

[ricohflex]

His lawyer claimed "he suffered from paranoid schizophrenia, and that he was delusional".

Has this claim been proven beyond all reasonable doubt? Was there any challenge to this statement by prosecution? And if no, then why no?

What if he was just trying not to pay the taxi fare, (e.g. having lost all at the casino) and was pretending to be mad?

It is acceptable that he did not plan to kill the cleaner. But his actions that day did kill the cleaner.

The judge backdated the sentence, which means he will be out very soon.

The danger of this is:

• If he was really WACKO, then you release him into society so soon (without any psychiatric treatment), so that he can repeat his previous actions?
What if next time he takes a knife and stabs someone to death?

• In this case, one foreigner killed another foreigner. Both were foreigners of low socio-economic status. It is worrying whether our judicial system has an alternate track of handing justice based on the socio-economic status of the accused and the victim. Seems like they want to wash hands of the matter fast and close the book.

 

[theRBK]

His lawyer claimed "he suffered from paranoid schizophrenia, and that he was delusional".

Has this claim been proven beyond all reasonable doubt? Was there any challenge to this statement by prosecution? And if no, then why no?

What if he was just trying not to pay the taxi fare, (e.g. having lost all at the casino) and was pretending to be mad?

It is acceptable that he did not plan to kill the cleaner. But his actions that day did kill the cleaner.

The judge backdated the sentence, which means he will be out very soon.

The danger of this is:

• If he was really WACKO, then you release him into society so soon (without any psychiatric treatment), so that he can repeat his previous actions?
What if next time he takes a knife and stabs someone to death?

• In this case, one foreigner killed another foreigner. Both were foreigners of low socio-economic status. It is worrying whether our judicial system has an alternate track of handing justice based on the socio-economic status of the accused and the victim. Seems like they want to wash hands of the matter fast and close the book.

in the full report of the story in today's Straits Times, pg A9, it was written that the the court-requested psychiatric report concluded that the hijacker was considered legally sane and therefore the judge ruled that the hijacker was aware of what he was doing and took that in account... thus, in the course of the case, due consideration was taken to check the hijacker's psychological status and the case was not merely swept under the carpet... ST reports on the web are usually abridged from the print story, and in this case, it omitted important details...

and your claim that they are of low socio-economic status... why would they want to sweep it under the carpet?... if they are of low socio-economic status, they would have no pull to exert on anyone right? why not just throw the book at the hijacker? that claim does not hold water...

and just for comparison sake, also in today's Straits Times, on pg B6:

Delivery driver jailed for driving after taking sleeping pills, causing fatal accident

truck driver took off-prescription sleeping pills, rear-ends a car; police finds him not drunk, passes breathalyzer test, driver claims he did not take any medication, that he is just sleepy, police allows him to go as it was a minor collision; driver slams into two motorcycles, causing one death and one injured... truck driver's sentence? nine months jail and eight years ban from driving any class of vehicle...

in comparison, the hijacker got a much longer jail term, no?

 

[theRBK]

Yes, you are absolutely right. My emotions got the better of me and I do apologise for that but I still feel the culprit was left off too lightly and a heavier sentence should be imposed regardless if whether he was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia in the past three months prior to the incident.

it is understandable, but really, our justice system is not as bad as what some of their critics, local and overseas, would like to portray it... they are, especially the rank and file police persons, just ordinary Singaporeans like we are, not some clique of evil poised to crush the will of the people...

 

[kei1309]

what it may seems wrong (very wrong) in our common people's mind; might not be the case to a judge / lawyer..

why do you think Lady Justice is blindfolded?

hint: it's not because she's into kinky shite

:bsmilie:

 

[ricohflex]

This is another recent case where both victim (who was badly wounded) and the culprit are foreigners of low socio-economic status.

It was a premeditated attack in which the culprit pretended to borrow a phone and wait for victim to turn his back and be off guard.

Deliveryman repeatedly slashed colleague's head and body with chopper

Coincidentally, (like in the taxi ram cleaner at Changi Airport case) the culprit in this case similarly gets off lightly because he was found to be suffering from some mental illness at the time of the offence.

There seem to be some cuckoo birds from PRC in Singapore.

 

[kei1309]

This is another recent case where both victim (who was badly wounded) and the culprit are foreigners of low socio-economic status.

It was a premeditated attack in which the culprit pretended to borrow a phone and wait for victim to turn his back and be off guard.

Deliveryman repeatedly slashed colleague's head and body with chopper

Coincidentally, (like in the taxi ram cleaner at Changi Airport case) the culprit in this case similarly gets off lightly because he was found to be suffering from some mental illness at the time of the offence.

There seem to be some cuckoo birds from PRC in Singapore.

so... Singapore has some cuckoo birds too?

don't forget the Downtown East murder case:
Downtown East murder: Five youths sentenced to jail and caning

also i find it weird that you're comparing the case of a man declared sane by a psychiatrist, who hijacked a vehicle and accidentally killed someone, to one in which the attacker INTENTIONALLY caused grievous hurt on his colleague because he's mentally unsound.

also, i can see that you're ignoring what theRBK posted, which was in reply to you:

in the full report of the story in today's Straits Times, pg A9, it was written that the the court-requested psychiatric report concluded that the hijacker was considered legally sane and therefore the judge ruled that the hijacker was aware of what he was doing and took that in account... thus, in the course of the case, due consideration was taken to check the hijacker's psychological status and the case was not merely swept under the carpet... ST reports on the web are usually abridged from the print story, and in this case, it omitted important details...

and your claim that they are of low socio-economic status... why would they want to sweep it under the carpet?... if they are of low socio-economic status, they would have no pull to exert on anyone right? why not just throw the book at the hijacker? that claim does not hold water...

and just for comparison sake, also in today's Straits Times, on pg B6:

Delivery driver jailed for driving after taking sleeping pills, causing fatal accident

truck driver took off-prescription sleeping pills, rear-ends a car; police finds him not drunk, passes breathalyzer test, driver claims he did not take any medication, that he is just sleepy, police allows him to go as it was a minor collision; driver slams into two motorcycles, causing one death and one injured... truck driver's sentence? nine months jail and eight years ban from driving any class of vehicle...

in comparison, the hijacker got a much longer jail term, no?