https://tinyurl.com/yynh7hgxhttps://i.ibb.co/S6PFYWn/stats.jpg\">
Latest posts made by Angelsdontexist
-
RE: Guy who filmed NUS undergrad showering.....
-
RE: Guy who filmed NUS undergrad showering.....
No ‘free passes’ for student sex offenders: Shanmugam
Sex offenders will be liable for their actions even if they are university students, Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam said yesterday.
Addressing questions on sexual misconduct in university campuses, he told Parliament that the police take a balanced approach towards such cases.
“Some have been prosecuted. Depending on facts, others have been give a second chance. There are no ‘free passes’ to university students, or for anyone else,” he stressed.
The question of whether student sex offenders were treated differently was raised online after National University of Singapore (NUS) undergraduate Monica Baey, 23, complained on social media that the student who filmed her showering in a campus residence had got off lightly.
Explaining how the police and Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) approach such cases, Mr Shanmugam highlighted situations where leniency was exercised or not.
The six autonomous universities received 56 reports of sexual misconduct by students in the past three academic years, starting from 2015/16, he said.
The victims in 37 cases made police reports. Two cases had insufficient evidence and four are still under investigation.
Of the remaining 31 cases, 16 were prosecuted in court, with 10 resulting in jail sentences and four with supervised probation. One case was given a discharge not amounting to an acquittal, and the convicted offender in another case is awaiting sentencing.
Of the 15 cases not taken to court, two were given a stern warning. The other 13 were given a conditional warning, meaning that if they commit another crime during a stipulated period, they will be charged with both offences.
Stressing that a conditional warning does bear weight, Mr Shanmugam cited Miss Baey’s case, in which the perpetrator, NUS student Nicholas Lim, 23, was issued a year’s conditional warning by the police.
“I should point out that Mr Lim is on thin ice, with his conditional warning… A conditional warning has been an effective deterrent for perpetrators who have had good propensity to reform,” he said.
Only one of the 13 cases given a conditional warning went on to commit another crime - an NUS student who was warned for a voyeurism offence in 2015 and re-offended in 2017. He was prosecuted in court for both offences and sent to jail for eight months and fined $2,000.
Noting that protecting the victim was vital, the minister said: “The criminal legal framework must deal with the offender in a way that ensures the specific victim’s safety, deal with the specific offender, and deter other would-be offenders.”
When a woman’s privacy is violated, follow-up actions must ensure she is treated with dignity and respect, with her concerns addressed and support given to her, he added.
Mr Shanmugam also stressed no leniency would be shown in such cases where the offender masked his face, covered closed-circuit TV cameras or used other means to evade detection.
Education Minister Ong Ye Kung, who also fielded questions on the issue from MPs yesterday, said 14 of the 56 cases had occurred off campus.
Noting that two-thirds of the total cases were related to voyeurism, such as Peeping Tom incidents and filming of people in vulnerable positions, Mr Ong emphasised the need to tackle the growing concern of voyeurism.
Calling for the universities’ disciplinary processes to be “stringent but fair”, he said: “We need to better balance the objectives of deterrence and redress for the victims against the rehabilitation of the offender.
” (This) is important for an education institution, but it should not end up with penalties that are too soft and too lenient."
Mr Ong noted the number of cases for each university is closely related to student numbers, with the 25 in NUS and 20 in Nanyang Technological University making up the bulk of the 56 cases.
The universities also carry out their own disciplinary processes and mete out a combination of penalties, including official reprimand that will be reflected in a student’s educational record, suspensions and expulsions.
Of the 56 cases, five are pending hearings and four students quit before sanctions were imposed, Mr Ong said.
Of the remaining 47 cases, 34 were officially reprimanded, 26 suspended for up to two academic terms, and 20 banned from entering students’ dormitories.
He said that while “two strikes and you’re out” cannot be applied across the board, expulsion must also not be the default for all forms of misconduct.
“We must ensure that potential offenders know the severe consequences of their actions, including the impact on their future,” he said. “We should always refrain from trial by media, doxxing and resorting to mob justice.” -
RE: Let's Talk about National Service
https://tinyurl.com/yyqktfvn
https://i.ibb.co/9WSr0hP/190506-online-howitzer-storyboard-new.jpg\">
-
RE: Malay boy put his hand inside girl's school skirt; caress her private part
go ask the mother yourself then.
-
RE: Malay boy put his hand inside girl's school skirt; caress her private part
http://theindependent.sg/kindergarten-student-allegedly-placed-hands-up-girls-skirt-mother-says-molest-and-goes-to-police/
Facebook user Drey Drey Yeo shared the case of a 6-year old boy who allegedly placed his hands up his classmate’s skirt. The girl was startled and tried unsuccessfully to stop him.
The following is the parent’s account of what transpired as shared by Drey Drey Yeo in her Facebook.
[fvplayer src=”http://youtube.com/watch?v=7jj1133pH5M”]
My younger daughter who is attending childcare at PCF Sparkletots preschool @ Taman Jurong Block 161 was molested in school yesterday during her afternoon nap time.
The boy who molested her was her 6 year old Malay classmate. At 1pm yesterday as usual the teacher instruct all the student in the childcare to take their afternoon nap.
What happen was, when my daughter was sound asleep, this Malay boy sneak up to her and put his hand inside of her school skirt (with a shorts attached) and started caressing her private part. The boy’s action shocked my daughter up from her sleep and in a state of shock and daze, she tried to stop the boy from touching her any further but the boy kept on forcing his way through.
At this point of time my daughter panicked and started to look around for help but not a single teacher was in sight and after awhile the housekeeper of the childcare centre appeared and only then the boy stopped what he was doing.
My daughter classmate saw everything the boy had done to my daughter and therefore there was eye witness and the boy admitted to his deed too after being questioned.
At about 5pm, my daughter’s form teacher called up, and inform me to go to school office immediately as something has happen to my daughter.
What has been followed up in the principal’s office was so disappointing. The principal just merely informed me that such a thing had happened to my daughter and the school has already done their part by calling up the boy’s mother. And the mother just told the principal
to beat her boy and thats it. The boy mother keep claiming she got headache and cannot be bothered with it. (never even bother to turn up)
As the principal told us that they are not allowed to beat the boy. What the school can do is to bring the boy away from my daughter and case closed. Not even a word of apology from the school and not even a word of apology from the boy’s parent.
Personally i feel that bringing the boy away from my daughter and putting him with other children is never going to solve the issue. Sooner or later there will be another victim if this is not resolved properly.
The principal just give me the feeling that she just want to push the responsibility away.
So i decided to go down to the police station last night to seek advice from the police.
I told the police i did not want to pursue anything against the 6 year old boy, because i feel it is the parent’s fault and also caused by the school negligence.
So the police told me to just withdraw out and change my girl to another childcare. Changing childcare means need to fork out thousands of dollars.
And why the offender continue in the school when the victim have to fork out money and change childcare? Where is the fairness?
Even the police officer also sympathise with my situation. and advised me to go to the school today and put pressure on the school.
But this morning when i went to the school, the form teacher told me the principal is on leave. (What the hell?!?!)
After contacting the principal, she states that she is on medical leave and she got more important matter to attend to in other childcare. (What the hell, are there anymore much serious case in other childcare centre than this at the moment?)
Damn piss off. The principal seems like she cant be bothered with it.
When my daughter’s form teacher heard me telling her that i am going to post my case into social media so that the higher authority can help me out. The principal immediately called me now and tell me to meet up. But its too late. Because you are too irresponsible as a principal. You lack the quality to be the principal of so many PCF childcare centre. I wondered how many hundreds or thousands of young children are been entrusted to you, they safety and welfare are definitely in danger.
This lead to why i decide to post this out to social media. Where is the justice? and members of the public please help me by telling me how can i seek justice. The name of the principal is MRS CAROLE TAN. And i believe she is the helper or some kind of grassroot leaders for our Deputy Prime Minister MR Tharman.
My girl is now feeling so frightened and traumatised. She even voiced out that she is so scared that it will happen again. she doesn’t want to nap in the school with the boy’s presence because she is afraid he would anytime crawl over to touch her again.its so devastating to hear this from her.
CASE 2 :
Just 3 months ago, my daughter was banged right into the face by her classmates leaving her with a bruised cut on her left eye and her brand new specs which cost $150 was broken
due to the impact. And 3 months ago the principal also handled the matter in a similar way. No apology from school. And when i seek assurances from the principal, the principal says that she cannot guarantee it will never happen again. So i asked her, if i make another new pair of specs for my daughter and her classmates breaks it again, means i have to keep repeatedly making new pair of specs for my daughter? And there was only silence. (silence means consent)
Same case.The boy’s mother never turn up and never compensate for the broken specs. (due to principal says when in dispute parents are not allowed to meet up) But i already forgive and forget, shouldn’t this be a basic courtesy to at least apologise to me?
In fact, the principal tell us to go and repair the broken specs. Why should i repair the brand new specs when the correct way should be compensating me back the same brand new pair.
After asserting some pressure on the principal, the principal come up with a CO -PAY plan which i turn down flatly.
(Can you imagine you bought a pair of brand new specs and i broke it, and i tell you to each pay half for it. What the hell the principal is thinking) Upon knowing that the boy family is not very well off, i decide to tell the principal to forgo the whole matter. Really regretted it.
Because if i have put lots of pressure on the school, today this molest case might not have happen to my daughter. Because i am sure the school would have make better arrangement if i had assert huge pressure on the school.
FAST FACTS :
– My daughter just enrolled into this childcare centre
– First week of school brand new specs broken by her male classmate.
– 3 months later, which is now being molested by Malay boy classmate.
– Total time in school only about 3 months.
– Principal of school really not up to standard
Help to share this post around and hopefully the higher authority can do something to assist or advise -
RE: Guy who filmed NUS undergrad showering.....
The Monica Baey Case Reveals NUS’ Severe Incompetence in Handling Sexual Misconduct
On 19 April 2019, NUS student Monica Baey published a string of Instagram Stories about a fellow student, Nicholas Lim Jun Kai, who had filmed her showering in her hostel’s bathroom last November.
Immediately after the incident, Monica lodged a report with campus security on 25 November 2018, who simply requested for the police case number if she decided to proceed with a police report too. The following day, she went to the police.
Over the phone, Monica shares with me that after the police meted out their sentence for Nicholas (i.e. a 12-month conditional warning, because he was a first-time offender), they advised Monica to approach NUS if she wanted further action. She then provided NUS with her statement, WhatsApp conversations, and CCTV footage that documented how Nicholas had previously snuck into another toilet.
Within a day, NUS told Monica she’d sent them her statement “a bit late”, and that they’d already arrived at a punishment. They claimed they’d taken her statement into account, but said the outcome “would have been the same”.
For filming a female student in a toilet, Nicholas was suspended from school for one semester, banned from entering campus residences, and made to write Monica a compulsory apology letter and attend compulsory counselling sessions.
Monica questioned NUS if this was “all” that Nicholas was getting, since a one-semester suspension was akin to going on a Leave of Absence or Overseas Exchange, which was what many regular students did anyway. After all, men have previously been jailed for filming people in public toilets.
In other words, there was a disturbing lack of serious, visible consequence that would reassure female students the university would support them in cases of sexual misconduct, or warn potential perpetrators that they would be similarly punished.
NUS also told Monica this was the “most serious punishment [they] can give someone because it deters his graduation and he has to explain to his family and friends why he’s not in school”— almost as though he was the victim here, not her.
Moreover, NUS did not offer her any form of victim support throughout the investigation. The only time they brought up any concern for her well-being was to inform her that she could “just let [them] know” if she needed counselling.
A lot more at https://www.domainofexperts.com/2019/04/the-monica-baey-case-reveals-nus-severe.html -
RE: The easy lie of meritocracy in education
Equity vs. Quality: Singapore's in a league of its own
Yesterday at an educational conference in Singapore, World Edulead 2019, Professor Pasi Sahlberg, an educational researcher from Finland, shared about equity (fairness) in education systems around the world.
At one point in his presentation, (he was using OECD PISA results to compare countries), he asked the conference hall of about a thousand school teachers, school administrators, and education ministry officials from Singapore and abroad, he asked us to turn the person next to us and predict where our country would fall on a graph that plotted student achievement against equity of outcomes.
And by equity of outcomes, meaning that how much students could achieve regardless of family socio-economic status. A measurement of how much your family's SES determines or doesn't determine your educational achievement. A measurement of the extent to which kids from poor families are able to beat the odds stacked against them.
I turned to the person next to me and predicted that Singapore would probably do really well in terms of academic achievement (we are tops in PISA - tests in English, Maths and Science).
And I thought, maybe we wouldn't do that fantastically in terms of equity, after all we all know (although that data is not publicly available) that students in Normal stream, in \"neighbourhood schools\" tend to come from lower SES families, while students in Express stream, in \"top\" schools tend to come from high SES families.
We know that richer families have the disposable income to spend on private tuition, enrichment classes and educational resources.
But I still believed while we would not be fantastic in terms of equity, we still shouldn't fare too badly, considering how much we spend on public school education so that all our govt schools are well resourced, our teachers and principals centrally hired and trained, our curriculum kept up to date and responsive to the changing needs of the 21st century.
And on top of that, our network of school subsidies, bursaries and financial assistance ensures that no child is denied an education because the family cannot afford it.
More at https://www.domainofexperts.com/2019/04/the-easy-lie-of-meritocracy-in-education.html