Discussion on Dr Ong Teck Chin

[dunnoleh]

2ppaamm:

Still don't understand the PR jargon. Well-worded you say? What does that mean? To sell the papers?

na... just to keep his pants on, before the final verdict.

* - my last post on this thread

[2ppaamm]

Also my last. Going back to work… I’ve said enough.

[3Boys]

WeiHan:

3Boys:

[quote=\"WeiHan\"]
If it isn't \"indecent\" enough, why should that \"victim\" thought that it can be an issue contacting ST.

The said victim quoted SMS messages and VMs. Inappropriate referencing and dialogue is enough in harassment, no physical indecency needs to have occurred. You are letting your imagination get the better of you.

3boys,

Surely, if I don't understand wrongly, dialogue and messages from a male person in attempt to procure commission from another male has already violate 377a. I didn't let my imagination goes wild. Please read carefully.

Section 377A (\"Outrages on decency\") states that:

Any male person who, in public or private, commits, or abets the commission of, or procures or attempts to procure the commission by any male person of, any act of gross indecency with another male person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years.[/quote]So, are you in possession of the knowledge that the content of those messages was an abetment to commit gross indecency?

An inappropriate approach can take many forms, even those not amounting to an 'attempt to procure' or 'abet' a 'gross indecency' may be enough to constitute a breach of conduct, enough for the board to take a serious view and for Dr OTC to resign. Therefore, the fact that he has resigned does not imply that the above had occurred.

For you to then take it all the way to prosecution under 377a is to leap a few steps forward without even considering the more likely intermediate possibilities. So yes, you have let your imagination take you out to left field.

You have an agenda pertaining to homosexuality, and this is the wrong thread to bandy this around.

[WeiHan]

3Boys:

WeiHan:

[quote=\"3Boys\"]
The said victim quoted SMS messages and VMs. Inappropriate referencing and dialogue is enough in harassment, no physical indecency needs to have occurred. You are letting your imagination get the better of you.

3boys,

Surely, if I don't understand wrongly, dialogue and messages from a male person in attempt to procure commission from another male has already violate 377a. I didn't let my imagination goes wild. Please read carefully.

Section 377A (\"Outrages on decency\") states that:

Any male person who, in public or private, commits, or abets the commission of, or procures or attempts to procure the commission by any male person of, any act of gross indecency with another male person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years.

So, are you in possession of the knowledge that the content of those messages was an abetment to commit gross indecency?

An inappropriate approach can take many forms, even those not amounting to an 'attempt to procure' or 'abet' a 'gross indecency' may be enough to constitute a breach of conduct, enough for the board to take a serious view and for Dr OTC to resign. Therefore, the fact that he has resigned does not imply that the above had occurred.

For you to then take it all the way to prosecution under 377a is to leap a few steps forward without even considering the more likely intermediate possibilities. So yes, you have let your imagination take you out to left field.

You have an agenda pertaining to homosexuality, and this is the wrong thread to bandy this around.[/quote]Read my first post. See the word \"if\" there?

I have an agenda pertaining to homosexuality? Just read the tone of my post. I just like to speculate possible scenarios and its implications.

[XtremeMEE]

Oh no, the discussion on what has been happening at ACS


is really heated. All I can say is I think it is a pity,

I have heard some good stuff about him from my cousin

who used to study there. Hope all goes well for him but if

he is really guilty, I feel bad for him. (even if it is

really his fault) He has done a lot of good for the

school and now all that is going to be swept underneath

the rumours and ugliness surrounding him now.

[Muffins]

What about this:


Dr. Ong is innocent, and this teacher was his assistant.

Because he was angry that OTC had fired him, he had turned a little :siao: When OTC had stepped out, who says he couldn't have left his phone there to charge, or that he left his email on, to save time from logging in. This assistant, could have himself sent messages and emails. And who would keep thosse messages? If I were him, getting those types of messages from someone, I wouldn't keep them, I would delete them, unless I knew that he was going to be interrogated by the police about it.

What do you guys think?

[verykiasu2010]

Muffins:

What about this:


Dr. Ong is innocent, and this teacher was his assistant.

Because he was angry that OTC had fired him, he had turned a little :siao: When OTC had stepped out, who says he couldn't have left his phone there to charge, or that he left his email on, to save time from logging in. This assistant, could have himself sent messages and emails. And who would keep thosse messages? If I were him, getting those types of messages from someone, I wouldn't keep them, I would delete them, unless I knew that he was going to be interrogated by the police about it.

What do you guys think?

Then all the more OTC must not resign hastily. Be should lodge a police report on criminal trespass and misuse of computer, and throw that accuser to Changi Hilton. He should be more clever than a non-contest and quit hastily to say want to go overseas to accumulate experience with a heart problem and suspected heart attack

[autumnbronze]

verykiasu2010:

Muffins:

What about this:


Dr. Ong is innocent, and this teacher was his assistant.

Because he was angry that OTC had fired him, he had turned a little :siao: When OTC had stepped out, who says he couldn't have left his phone there to charge, or that he left his email on, to save time from logging in. This assistant, could have himself sent messages and emails. And who would keep thosse messages? If I were him, getting those types of messages from someone, I wouldn't keep them, I would delete them, unless I knew that he was going to be interrogated by the police about it.

What do you guys think?

Then all the more OTC must not resign hastily. Be should lodge a police report on criminal trespass and misuse of computer, and throw that accuser to Changi Hilton. He should be more clever than a non-contest and quit hastily to say want to go overseas to accumulate experience with a heart problem and suspected heart attack

Sometimes things cannot be perceived in black and white

because

in reality

there are always always (repetition deliberate) shades of grey ....


Let me tell a story.

Fact or fiction - you all decide.

There was once a teacher teaching in quite a reputable school. This teacher found out through one of his student's blog that one of them had paid another classmate to do his project work for him.

Now, this teacher had just started his teaching career. Being new, he approached another teacher to seek advice. This colleague advised him to lodge a report to his HOD so as to prevent similar happenings in other levels/departments.

Which he did. But there was no formal investigation done and suffice to say, it would have been a long drawn investigation with uncertain conclusions. It was just decided that the project work grades will not be reflected as CA marks.

Then some months later, after the ranking exercise, the teacher was slapped with an unfavorable rank. The reason given was that the teacher was negligent in ensuring that the pupil's work was done by themselves. (Actually, there was another matter that cropped up which happened during a class test in which the teacher once again had to lodge a report. This time investigations were conducted without the teacher present nor was the teacher ever consulted. The teacher was only informed much later, that the matter had been sorted by the DM).

My question is (going back to the project work) - how can the teacher be considered as being 'negligent' when the kids are given several weeks to finish up their project work on their own at home. To be considered as negligent, this can only happen if there is direct plagerism involved and if the standard of the student's project work vastly differs (if the student is relatively weak in that subject and suddenly does very well in the PW) from his normal school work and the teacher was not alert enough to detect it. In this case, there was no disparity.

Also, it was never proved that the 'poster' had posted the truth or had done it out of spite.

Apart from the incidents mentioned, the teacher had done very well in other areas of his work.

So another question - did the teacher do the right thing in lodging the report??

It can be said that sometimes, in one's professional work life, best to leave some things unsaid .... it shouldn't be so, but I do believe that it is so.

Food for thought, if I may suggest :idea:

Actually, I just wanted to share another perspective of this saga. I do not know the said \"accused\" or his family, nor have any links/ties/relatives or vested interests etc .... with/in the school.

And ohhhh, I do see myself somewhat aligned with 3boys' and 2ppaamm's train of thought in this matter.

Just my VERY humble opinion

[atutor2001]

Sorry, tried very hard to find similarities but can’t find - don’t know how to link the 2 episodes.

[verykiasu2010]

those are totally different kind of scenarios for any comparison at all


越描越黑

one has the position of power and top authority, the other has not

one is a newbie, the other is an old bird who sets the system