Principal of top school under investigation for hiring prost
-
limlim:
limlim ah... actually we are saying the same things except saying it differently about the convicted men part.
Does the girl looked young? or look matured like 30+?ksi:
I don't think they knew they were dealing with a shady stall.
They probably thought they were leaving things in the good hands of a professional who would have known all the rules pertaining to under age prostitution plus they indicated on the website that she was 18. It is quite a typical consumer behaviour here that we do not check the certification and authenticity of the products that we buy as long as we buy via recommendation or a vendor we think have a passable reputation.
I am not condoning their act based on morals grounds just like gambling and smoking but they are consumers of a trade that is legal in Singapore. Hence objectively they are victims in a way of poor vendor business ethics.
Apparently.. she looked young.. and that, is a selling point.. youth.
What if they purposely seek out this site, hoping to lay an underage girl as bonus? instead of those geylang stall which confirmed is matured offerings.
If the girl looked mature like 30+, then maybe I would agree that they are \"innocent\" victims.
As for the last part, I would agree that the pimp should be dealt a heavy sentence..
As for the prostitute, probably she should get some punishment too.. if she is deceitful and dishonest in business dealings.
1.We agree with the law that anyone who has sexual activity with an underage prostitute deserves to be punished.
2. We agree that the pimp who misrepresented the age deserves to be punished.
3. We agree that the girl who knows she is underage and yet \"works\" in that industry without the right permit deserves to be punished.
What we do not quite agree is the way we look at the error committed by the convicted men.
1(a). One view is using the intent of looking for young girls to assume those men deserved the punishment. You are right that they preferred younger ones since 18 was stated in the website but legally nothing wrong with that. As in all products, if there is a range of available sizes, so people make their choices. Of course we can think of them as \"hum sup\" and that is only an opinion but this is not legally wrong, perhaps morally. (b)If they knew she was 16 and went ahead, then yes, they were looking for the thrill to violate 2 things, a young girl and the law, but neither was clear since the girl's age was stated as 18.
2. The other view is as consumers, the mistake they make is relying too much on the vendor's provided information with too much trust, landing themselves in hot soup. Not second guessing the intent but rather lack in prudence to check validity of the claim especially there is a law so close to the age criteria.
In (1a), there is some guessing of intent. (1b) assumes some wanted double thrills. In (2) no guessing of intent or thrill but it was clear that they did not validate the age of the girl. -
AC_Power:
Usually, but not always.
In most of the legislation, it is always the prosecution who has the burden of proof, even for murder cases. I do not see why for such case we have to shift it to the defense.
Just to give an example, especially immigration offences.
If an illegal immigrant is found in your flat, the burden of proof is also on the defence. The DPP just have to prove that the person is indeed staying in your flat, that's all. They do not have to prove the intention to \"rent the place to illegal immigrant\". the intention is implied.
The onus is on the owner to verify the passport of the occupant for legal stay in Singapore. You cannot claim that you are not aware the person is not holding a valid pass when you rent your place to them.
Hence, this prostitution case is not unique.
If it is unique, then, maybe you have a stronger case to argue that it is too unreasonable. -
ksi:
If I were to ask for your opinion on the below example..
2. The other view is as consumers, the mistake they make is relying too much on the vendor's provided information with too much trust, landing themselves in hot soup. Not second guessing the intent but rather lack in prudence to check validity of the claim especially there is a law so close to the age criteria.
Owner A rent out his flat to illegal immigrant B. A ask B whether he got a valid pass to stay in Singapore, the person replied yes. A never checked and believed B. B was caught by ICA, and A was charged and convicted.
Would you say that the law is unreasonable too? (sorrie.. were you suggesting the law in relation to the conviction of the men is \"unreasonable\"? or maybe another word is more suitable?)
Same, a case of failure to exercise due diligence. Apparently, B is out to mislead A.
[quote]Consequences of Harbouring Overstayers and/or Illegal Immigrants
Under the Immigration Act, the homeowner is liable to be charged for harbouring overstayers and/or illegal immigrants in his house if investigations reveal that he has not exercised due diligence as required by the law.
If the homeowner is found guilty of recklessly (i.e. failing to carry out all three due diligence checks or carrying out only one of these checks) or knowingly harbouring overstayers and/or illegal immigrants, he may be sentenced to imprisonment of not less than six months and not more than two years AND a fine not exceeding S$6,000.
If a homeowner is found guilty of negligently (i.e. carrying out only two of the three due diligence checks) harbouring overstayers and/or illegal immigrants, he may be liable to a fine not exceeding S$6,000 OR to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months OR to both. [/quote] -
limlim:
You never read the \"we agree\" part? We agree the men are supposed to face punishment but my view is not to speculate their intent as it can be varied for the 50+ men. Why worry their intent is to seek out young prostitutes as the law takes care of that if they are too young?
If I were to ask for your opinion on the below example..ksi:
2. The other view is as consumers, the mistake they make is relying too much on the vendor's provided information with too much trust, landing themselves in hot soup. Not second guessing the intent but rather lack in prudence to check validity of the claim especially there is a law so close to the age criteria.
Owner A rent out his flat to illegal immigrant B. A ask B whether he got a valid pass to stay in Singapore, the person replied yes. A never checked and believed B. B was caught by ICA, and A was charged and convicted.
Would you say that the law is unreasonable too? (sorrie.. were you suggesting the law in relation to the conviction of the men is \"unreasonable\"? or maybe another word is more suitable?)
Same, a case of failure to exercise due diligence. Apparently, B is out to mislead A.
The certainty was a common mistake they made was never do their due diligence to validate the age and we agree too. However, B out to mislead A should also be punished) B=pimp(vendor) and A=the men(buyer). (although this example you give is not a 1-1 match because it is not a vendor/buyer relationship but a landlord/tenant, a landlord must check a foreign tenant staying rights whereas a buyer should check vendor's claims of its services or products) Should use another matching analogy, this one tends to confuse. -
I guess.. the disagreement between us is whether they are \"victims\".. am I right?
\" Hence objectively they are victims in a way of poor vendor business ethics.\"
I don't feel that they are \"victims\" just bcoz the obligation is on them to verify the ID. But that is just personal opinion subject to disagreement.
But anyway, going by your statement above.. I wonder if they can file a civil suit against the vendor for negligence and failure in duty of care to consumers.. :evil: :evil:
If that business transaction is legal (prostitution by itself), then, duty of care exists.. right?
-
-
phtthp:
Bargain some more... Double the 12 originally given!video (what the Judge said)
http://www.straitstimes.com/the-big-story/online-vice-trial/story/howard-shaw-sentenced-12-weeks-jail
http://www.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20120731-362346.html -
Chiang (father of a 3.5 year old son) jailed 12 weeks :-
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1219829/1/.html -
read from the chinese papers a few days ago:
there's a group of PRC young girls who come here to work as prostitutes, some of them claim to be students back home and some studying here. The reporter went undercover and talked to one who claim to be 19 yrs old. She charges $1xx each time and will work for 6 mths before leaving. She claim to be holding a 'singer/entertainment' pass though she can't sing a note and merely use it to work freelance here.Seems like she advertise her services online. When asked for passport to ascertain her actual age, she refused saying that 'its the rule of the game'. From the photos of 3 girls (with eyes shielded), they really look like teenagers. Apparently the demand for young girls were so good that some were serving 20 men a day. :yikes: -
limlim:
It will never go to court.... The pimp will offer compensation in kind to retain the customer and stay in biz. :callme: :hugs: :love:I guess.. the disagreement between us is whether they are \"victims\".. am I right?
\" Hence objectively they are victims in a way of poor vendor business ethics.\"
I don't feel that they are \"victims\" just bcoz the obligation is on them to verify the ID. But that is just personal opinion subject to disagreement.
But anyway, going by your statement above.. I wonder if they can file a civil suit against the vendor for negligence and failure in duty of care to consumers.. :evil: :evil:
If that business transaction is legal (prostitution by itself), then, duty of care exists.. right?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better š
Register Login