Principal of top school under investigation for hiring prost

[corneyAmber]

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.

[limlim]

AC_Power:

Just feel a little \"ai wan\" for these men. I do not think anyone of them has the intention of hiring an underage prostitute but because they failed to exercise due diligence, they are now facing the music.

well.. \"that\", is your view/opinion..

from the way I view it (just personal view/opinion), they would engage the service of under-aged prostitute if deep inside they knew she is underage, but is not advertised as such. Then, if caught, try to wiggle their way out finding all sorts of excuses.

The law has to be the way it is, to effectively protect the minors and provide deterrence against engaging the service of underage prostitute.

If \"reasonable mistake as to age\" were to be a valid defense, the law will have no bite. Everyone will just cook up excuses that they are lied about the age, even if they explicitly seek out underage prostitutes. There are 1001 ways to exploit the loophole.

Let's talk about \"intent\". It is natural that a man would want to up a young woman. It would be ridiculous and difficult to expect prosecution to bear the burden of proof of intent. For such case, the burden of proof will be on the defense, to prove beyond reasonable doubt, how their client does not have the intent to upz the young woman. If they exercise due diligence and checked the iD, it would be apparent that they indeed do not have the intent to seek the service of underage prostitute. If no proof.. then, have to go by reasonableness of natural attraction.. The man does indeed have the \"intent\".

[verykiasu2010]

both of you are trying to divine the mind of the customers .... :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

[limlim]

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.

Does the girl looked young? or look matured like 30+?

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.

[limlim]

verykiasu2010:

both of you are trying to divine the mind of the customers .... :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

if you're a client and there is no such law.. would you engage the service of <18 yo? :evil:

If there are 2 sisters (look alike, except age), one is <18, one is >28, which one would you pick? :evil:

[verykiasu2010]

limlim:

verykiasu2010:

both of you are trying to divine the mind of the customers .... :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

if you're a client and there is no such law.. would you engage the service of <18 yo? :evil:

If there are 2 sisters (look alike, except age), one is <18, one is >28, which one would you pick? :evil:

:rotflmao: tell us your choice first, and see whether any ksp guessed correctly :evil: :evil: ....less than 18 and more than 28 .... how to be like .... go buy 4D on 1828 or 2818, big and small

[BeContented]

verykiasu2010:

limlim:

[quote=\"verykiasu2010\"]both of you are trying to divine the mind of the customers .... :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

if you're a client and there is no such law.. would you engage the service of <18 yo? :evil:

If there are 2 sisters (look alike, except age), one is <18, one is >28, which one would you pick? :evil:

:rotflmao: tell us your choice first, and see whether any ksp guessed correctly :evil: :evil: ....less than 18 and more than 28 .... how to be like .... go buy 4D on 1828 or 2818, big and small[/quote]As a woman, answer to x8 is super clear to me. :evil:
I would suppose the client would not be willing to pay such a high price for a 'ripe fruit' :mad:

[fightingmom]

verykiasu2010:

limlim:

[quote=\"verykiasu2010\"]both of you are trying to divine the mind of the customers .... :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

if you're a client and there is no such law.. would you engage the service of <18 yo? :evil:

If there are 2 sisters (look alike, except age), one is <18, one is >28, which one would you pick? :evil:

:rotflmao: tell us your choice first, and see whether any ksp guessed correctly :evil: :evil: ....less than 18 and more than 28 .... how to be like .... go buy 4D on 1828 or 2818, big and small[/quote]Wah ... 4D number for the weekend lei ... :evil: :evil:

[limlim]

verykiasu2010:

limlim:

[quote=\"verykiasu2010\"]both of you are trying to divine the mind of the customers .... :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

if you're a client and there is no such law.. would you engage the service of <18 yo? :evil:

If there are 2 sisters (look alike, except age), one is <18, one is >28, which one would you pick? :evil:

:rotflmao: tell us your choice first, and see whether any ksp guessed correctly :evil: :evil: ....less than 18 and more than 28 .... how to be like .... go buy 4D on 1828 or 2818, big and small[/quote]The point is, youth, is a selling point. Don't tell me the man are not attracted by it.

So, if you tell me they have no \"intent\".. I don't believe it..

Hence, I believe in this case, the law is just.

The law is simple.. physical act is proven. intent is implied.. there's no running away. Unless.. they check the ID..

[AC_Power]

limlim:

AC_Power:

Just feel a little \"ai wan\" for these men. I do not think anyone of them has the intention of hiring an underage prostitute but because they failed to exercise due diligence, they are now facing the music.

well.. \"that\", is your view/opinion..

from the way I view it (just personal view/opinion), they would engage the service of under-aged prostitute if deep inside they knew she is underage, but is not advertised as such. Then, if caught, try to wiggle their way out finding all sorts of excuses.

The law has to be the way it is, to effectively protect the minors and provide deterrence against engaging the service of underage prostitute.

If \"reasonable mistake as to age\" were to be a valid defense, the law will have no bite. Everyone will just cook up excuses that they are lied about the age, even if they explicitly seek out underage prostitutes. There are 1001 ways to exploit the loophole.

Let's talk about \"intent\". It is natural that a man would want to up a young woman. It would be ridiculous and difficult to expect prosecution to bear the burden of proof of intent. For such case, the burden of proof will be on the defense, to prove beyond reasonable doubt, how their client does not have the intent to upz the young woman. If they exercise due diligence and checked the iD, it would be apparent that they indeed do not have the intent to seek the service of underage prostitute. If no proof.. then, have to go by reasonableness of natural attraction.. The man does indeed have the \"intent\".

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.

Yes, if given a choice and paying the same amount, those men will choose a 18 instead of 28 or 38. But that's beside the point.

My point is that they did not actively search out for underaged prostitutes but being conned into believing that she is indeed 18 as advertised by the pimp.

If we really want to \"effectively protect the minors and provide deterrence against engaging the service of underage prostitute\", we should punish the pimp hard. If the pimp knows that he has an underage girl working for him and he will be punished severely if she gets caught, would he still want to risk it? Isn't this a better way to protect the minors?

In any case, we just agree to disagree then.