Child-porn owning student an MOE scholar

[rosemummy]

micko07:

rosemummy:

His peeping offence is more serious than i initially thought. It took place in the girls' toilet of a primary school when he was 15. It means he had also committed the offence of trespassing to another primary school. The primary school should have made a police report instead of just letting his school deal with it.


Also, I can't see why they rely on testimonials alone. Aren't a student's disciplinary records available to MOE? I've been told that serious disciplinary offences will be a permanent black mark in the student's records with MOE. Being late for school for 4 times in a year would be considered sufficiently serious to warrant that. But how is it that peeping incidents, which is a sexual offence, is not in the record?

Where did you hear or read that he committed the offence in a primary school? I spoke to my tutor, who taught him previously, and my tutor said it was at the College section of Hwa Chong. This was also stated by a friend whose cousin was his classmate at HCI. Not that this lessens the severity of his act, just curious to know where you get your information from.

I'm also shocked that disciplinary records aren't scrutinized by scholarship bodies. I always thought they did; that's what I was told for years! Guess they will from henceforth to prevent such lapses.

Regarding testimonials: I was told that the JC tutor thought it was unnecessary to include it because he had behaved perfectly well in JC. Why his secondary school teacher failed to include it is a bit weird to me, especially for a teaching scholarship, but it's probably because he didn't want to blacklist the student for life and spare him the stigma. A second chance which he failed to use. He's not the only one - Loads of young people make immature and idiotic mistakes. There's a reason why we have a Juvenile court.

It's all over the news. Here's a link:
http://www.edvantage.com.sg/edvantage/news/news/497972/_We_knew_he_had_issues_.html

Quoted from the news article:
\"His ex-classmates and schoolmates say Wong was punished after he had gone over to a nearby primary school and had hidden in a girls' toilet there. He then peeped at the primary school girls.\"

It's 1 thing to give a person, be it a young offender or otherwise, a second chance, it's another thing to do that at the expense of taxpayers and his future charges. Moreover, the offence was planned, not something he did at the spur of the moment.

As for testimonial, the teacher writing it should include all the facts and leave it to the panel making the scholarship decisions to decide if he should be granted a scholarship. They should mention the incident and how he had responded to counselling. By hiding such facts and the panel making a decision without the benefit of such facts, another student who could be awarded the scholarship is deprived of the opportunity.

But the bottomline is still that MOE should check the student's disciplinary records.

[rosemummy]

starlight1968sg:

micko07:

I'm also shocked that disciplinary records aren't scrutinized by scholarship bodies. I always thought they did; that's what I was told for years! Guess they will from henceforth to prevent such lapses.

If a family member has committed such an offence, I am pretty sure his family members would want a 2nd chance instead of carrying this black mark for the rest of his life.
Furthermore he has received punishment and counselling. His behaviour showed him sufficiently well again.
Isn't this what our government encouraging the yellow ribbon programme?
Having said that, he didn't learn from his lesson and now caught should be severely dealt with.

We should also be asking if anyone is comfortable having your young daughters taught by someone like him. I don't think so. It's 1 thing to give the person a second chance, it's another thing to give him a second chance by putting him in a position which makes it easy for him to commit the same offence.

He can be given a second chance, but not a scholarship at the taxpayer's expense when there are many others more deserving candidates. He can be given a second chance, but not by putting the young in our schools at risk. It's fine for the government to employ him in a museum as a curator, but not as a teacher.

[24hr-mum]

agree. u can argue that for a man to be attracted to a woman is a human nature but to be sexually attracted to a child - that’s a pervert mindset.


to make him a teacher is only to tempt him even more…

[vicki]

24hr-mum:

agree. u can argue that for a man to be attracted to a woman is a human nature but to be sexually attracted to a child - that's a pervert mindset.


to make him a teacher is only to tempt him even more....

Basically....

好色 vs 变态

[Fairy]

24hr-mum:

i suspect the teachers overlook the seriousness of his misbehaviour because he was academically bright. usually teachers are like that, biased towards the best and the weakest students in either direction

Schools, especially the top ones are very competitive. The number of their students being awarded prestigious scholarships will also add glory to the school's reputation and record.

[peh-boo]

what if ur very own kid happens to be in his class?

[phankao]

peh-boo:

what if ur very own kid happens to be in his class?

Was yours?

[buds]

24hr-mum:

...u can argue that for a man to be attracted to a woman is a human nature but to be sexually attracted to a child - that's a pervert mindset.

What if the context is say... :idea:

50+ yr old man attracted to teenaged school girls?

As perverted?

[buds]

ManU123:

i wonder which sec school he was teaching :?

It was only reported as \"secondary school in the west\"...

[24hr-mum]

ya i wld still say its peverted for old man to be attracted to teenage girl. its like attracted to ur own daughter.