Principal of top school under investigation for hiring prost
-
sgmodel:
Yes.So if the man had asked for and been showed a fake IC by the girl, it would have been relevant?
sgmodel:
I doubt so. Please substantiate with proof of your claim.Guess what, even if the above is true, the man would still be guilty according to the law.
Any man have ever been charged and convicted when the girl actually shown a fake IC that the man can reasonably be made believe to represent the girl herself?
If the girl pulled out her father IC showing age 40, cannot expect the court to accept that as mitigation factor right?sgmodel:
Depends on what action. Her private collection of fake ICs kept in her closet and not shown to the man has no bearing on the case as far as due diligence by the man is concerned. Right?Is it fair that the actions of the girl is totally disregarded here in this instance? Even in the case of rape, the girl has to object for there to be a case of rape, and in murder/assault where provocation by the other party is also a considered factor.
And you're wrong about rape. A rapist can be guilty even if the victim is unconscious, under influence of alcohol, or drugs (no objection to the act).
You're wrong about murder too. provocation is not a critical consideration. The \"intent\" is. The assassin may be paid to kill even if victim never provoke him, and be guilty of murder.sgmodel:
Again, please substantiate your claim.Worse, what is to stop the next underaged girl to use a fake IC and deceive people into having sex with her and having many men unwittingly breaking the law and getting punished? And if she's any more enterprising she may just blackmail all these clients if not she will report to the police since the law is so lopsided.
I do not believe a man who practiced due diligence can so easily be charged or held ransom.sgmodel:
Yes. If impersonation or possession of fake ID is against the law.Also, do you think any action should be taken on the girl for using a fake IC? So far no action has been taken on her and she is still classified as a victim with her identity protected.
But that is another matter, another topic.
She may be charged as named, for the above crimes.
But the fake ID case may not be linked to the prostitution case in the reporting.sgmodel:
[/quote]
Yes of coz.limlim:
[quote=\"sgmodel\"]Do you all think that a jail sentence is warranted in light of this revelation?
It is not relevant whether the girl has a fake IC in her safe deposit box or whatever, but whether the accused asked for it and whether a fake ID was shown to the man to mislead him.
In other words, the \"revelation\" is irrelevant.
He never check, she never show, end of story. -
sgmodel,
do you sell handphone before? did the shop ask for your IC? It contains private information about yourself. Do you show? Sure, you can don’t show, and the shop can choose not to do your business.
If the shop did not check seller IC and the phone is found to be stolen goods and traced to the shop, the shop is liable. It is on the onus of the shop to check, they failed to check, they face the law, as simple as that, even if they claim the seller looked too innocent to possession of a stolen phone.
Reasonableness depends on how the law is defined.
If you rent out your flat, the onus is on owner to check tenant is not illegal immigrant, even if the tenant looks 105% like a Singaporean, owner need to check IC/Passport. Same principle.
This underage prostitution case is not the only one where burden of proof is on the defence.
A demand for underage prostitute can lead to exploitation of minors, and the law serves to provide deterrence too against undesirable vice. -
sgmodel:
Don't visit prostitutes? But its not illegal, the government says its ok. What exactly is the message here being sent?
Prostitution is a complex issue and is a subject of study of its own. However, in our day to day affairs, we should not be setting our own moral standards based on what is legal and not legal. Just because it is made legal does not mean it is a right / good thing to do. -
whether legal or not, men should Not visit prostitute !
-
limlim,
This legislation was drafted as a \"strict liability\" offence whereby an offender will be automatically guilty regardless of intent. In PP v Tan Chye Hin, the High Court judge had given a sentencing benchmark that spells out the culpability spectrum, whereby it was defined that the only way an offender could have gotten off with a fine was that he was shown a fake IC that causes him to believe that the girl was of legal age. Do note that this still means that the verdict will be guilty even if the offender was deceived.
Also, if you had read the article, it was already stated that the girl had in her possession an IC stating her age as 19, and not as a 40 year old man. It is also stated that she had wanted to bring along the IC when meeting up with the client, why do you think this is so? To show off her private fake IC collection as you claim? Now I think it is obvious what her intentions for the fake IC is for, and hence I do not see any point in arguing for the sake of arguing by throwing in unlikely and far fetched scenarios.
Now in the case of rape, if no objection was given then obviously it is rape but if consent was given then no rape occurred. So definitely the actions (or inaction if you may so argue) definitely is a factor for consideration. Just look at the recent PP v Ong Ming Hwee.
In the case of murder, charges may be amended to a lesser charge based on the actions of the other party, such as whether the accused had acted in self defence, whether there was provocation etc. How do you prove \"intent\"? Through examination of the circumstances which must include the actions of the other party.
You don't believe how easily can a person be charged or held ransom? Well if today I'm a 17 year old, I prostitute myself and deceive you into thinking I'm above age, and then to tell you actually I'm a minor. And then I ask you to pay me a sum of money failing which I will report you to the police, do you think the man will pay up or dare me to report police, especially after seeing how this case is being handled? Maybe you're thinking it should be obvious if the IC is fake? Well of cos if she's using her dad or mom's IC then it's a dead giveaway, but do you think someone with the intent to cheat will be so dumb? Go look at the clubs, how many girls are entering the clubs with fake ICs?
Going to your example of a handphone shop. If we apply the same logic of this law to the law pertaining to possession of stolen goods, it would mean that the shop is automatically guilty as long as the stolen handphone is in its possession, even if it had checked the IC of the seller (and whether the seller had used a fake IC or not is irrelevant to the guilt of the shop). Does this sound fair to you?
Renting of property to illegal immigrants; even if you were shown forged documents and reasonably believed that they were real and had unwittingly broken the law, you would still be found guilty. It's not even about checking or not checking. Read here: http://www.singapore-window.org/sw00/000407st.htm Again, is this fair?
I agree with you that demand for underaged prostitution is undesirable and will lead to exploitation of minors, but in this case, was the demand for underaged prostitution in the first place?? -
phtthp:
whether legal or not, men should Not visit prostitute !
whether moral or not, it should not be the determining factor for guilt in the courts!
what's legal may not be moral, what's moral may not be legal, I hope you don't mix up legality and morality here.
should michael palmer be jailed too since he had an EMA and hence had engaged in an immoral activity? -
concern2:
Yes I agree with you that we should not be setting our own moral standards based on what is legal and not legal.sgmodel:
Don't visit prostitutes? But its not illegal, the government says its ok. What exactly is the message here being sent?
Prostitution is a complex issue and is a subject of study of its own. However, in our day to day affairs, we should not be setting our own moral standards based on what is legal and not legal. Just because it is made legal does not mean it is a right / good thing to do.
And that's precisely why we shouldn't be making statements to the effect that however these men are treated under the law is justified since they did something immoral and they should be punished for their immoral act.
In fact, if any one of them is single, what's so immoral about engaging the services of prostitutes vs having affairs, flings or worse molesting/raping women? -
sgmodel:
Excuse me, what's so immoral about molesting or raping a women? Goodness. :slapshead:
In fact, if any one of them is single, what's so immoral about engaging the services of prostitutes vs having affairs, flings or worse molesting/raping women?
\"One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself\". Understand what this means? -
sgmodel:
Once again, were there any examples of such cases?
This legislation was drafted as a \"strict liability\" offence whereby an offender will be automatically guilty regardless of intent. In PP v Tan Chye Hin, the High Court judge had given a sentencing benchmark that spells out the culpability spectrum, whereby it was defined that the only way an offender could have gotten off with a fine was that he was shown a fake IC that causes him to believe that the girl was of legal age. Do note that this still means that the verdict will be guilty even if the offender was deceived.
It is said that an offender could hv gotten off with a fine if he was show a fake IC. It could be that in such case the IC is obviously fake.
If the IC is like real, or she use a friend's ic who looked so much like herself, I would feel that it is not fair to convict the man.
Let's not speculate on this.. until someone was indeed convicted when he is lead to believe beyond reasonable doubt that the prostitute is indeed of age. Then, I agree it is unfair and unjust to convict the man who exercised due diligent.sgmodel:
This is irrelevant to the argument. The crucial thing is the man did not check.
Also, if you had read the article, it was already stated that the girl had in her possession an IC stating her age as 19, and not as a 40 year old man. It is also stated that she had wanted to bring along the IC when meeting up with the client, why do you think this is so? To show off her private fake IC collection as you claim? Now I think it is obvious what her intentions for the fake IC is for, and hence I do not see any point in arguing for the sake of arguing by throwing in unlikely and far fetched scenarios.sgmodel:
I did not say it is not a factor. I'm saying no objection doesn't mean consent, and provocation is not a necessity.Now in the case of rape, if no objection was given then obviously it is rape but if consent was given then no rape occurred. So definitely the actions (or inaction if you may so argue) definitely is a factor for consideration. Just look at the recent PP v Ong Ming Hwee.
In the case of murder, charges may be amended to a lesser charge based on the actions of the other party, such as whether the accused had acted in self defence, whether there was provocation etc. How do you prove \"intent\"? Through examination of the circumstances which must include the actions of the other party.sgmodel:
Again, you can succeed only if the man doesn't exercise due diligent.You don't believe how easily can a person be charged or held ransom? Well if today I'm a 17 year old, I prostitute myself and deceive you into thinking I'm above age, and then to tell you actually I'm a minor. And then I ask you to pay me a sum of money failing which I will report you to the police, do you think the man will pay up or dare me to report police, especially after seeing how this case is being handled? Maybe you're thinking it should be obvious if the IC is fake? Well of cos if she's using her dad or mom's IC then it's a dead giveaway, but do you think someone with the intent to cheat will be so dumb? Go look at the clubs, how many girls are entering the clubs with fake ICs?
Let's not speculate whether she indeed have a \"like real\" IC. You're assuming she does. Again, this is irrelevant.
What is relevant is, did she show it to the man? THAT, is the most important question that matters. And, if she indeed show it to the man, then, we consider if the IC can be believed to be hers or not.sgmodel:
It doesn't matter whether the phone is still in the shop. If the shop didn't exercise due diligence, they are guilty of an offense.Going to your example of a handphone shop. If we apply the same logic of this law to the law pertaining to possession of stolen goods, it would mean that the shop is automatically guilty as long as the stolen handphone is in its possession, even if it had checked the IC of the seller (and whether the seller had used a fake IC or not is irrelevant to the guilt of the shop). Does this sound fair to you?
If the shop checked, they would provide the particulars of the seller to the police and that's it. They have nothing more to do with the case.
The shop's obligation is only to check the particulars of the seller. I feel it is fair.
To provide some form of deterrence towards phone theft.sgmodel:
Keyword is \"Due Diligence\".Renting of property to illegal immigrants; even if you were shown forged documents and reasonably believed that they were real and had unwittingly broken the law, you would still be found guilty. It's not even about checking or not checking. Read here: http://www.singapore-window.org/sw00/000407st.htm Again, is this fair?
If the prostitute showed her grandfather's IC and the man believes it is hers, that is not \"due diligence\". That is Gross negligence..
That is just an example to illustrate the point.. not to say she really had a collection of fake ICs or grandfathers IC. -
concern2:
You very sharp leh..... I didn't even read that part.....
Excuse me, what's so immoral about molesting or raping a women? Goodness. :slapshead:sgmodel:
In fact, if any one of them is single, what's so immoral about engaging the services of prostitutes vs having affairs, flings or worse molesting/raping women?
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 💗
Register Login