Guy who filmed NUS undergrad showering.....

General comments and chit-chat, or tell us how we can improve KiasuParents.com
Post Reply
pirate
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
Posts: 4711
Joined: Mon Jul 02,
Total Likes:173

Re: Guy who filmed NUS undergrad showering.....

Post by pirate » Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:15 pm

:roll: Wah! All these netizens know how many police officers went to arrest the NUS student. How long was the police interrogation? Where got say? Can point me to a link?

Conditional warning is given AFTER Investigations are complete. Benjamin Lim jumped even BEFORE investigations were complete, after only one police interview. Are these netizens stupid? Or is there some mischief behind all these misleading comparisons and deliberate stupidity?

.zeit
BlueBelt
BlueBelt
Posts: 407
Joined: Wed Aug 22,
Total Likes:5

Re: Guy who filmed NUS undergrad showering.....

Post by .zeit » Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:33 pm

pirate wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:59 pm
Dreamaurora wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:02 pm
Let's remove NUS from the equation, what the guy did was a criminal offence, plain and simple.

It does not matter if he's an ace student or a lazy bum, he is an adult and should be tried as such. We have faith in the law because we expect the law to be consistent in meting out punishments to maintain order, otherwise the society would descend into chaos.

If he does the crime, then he should go to jail, and the prison will provide an avenue to rehabilitate him. NUS is not obligated to rehabilitate him, it is a place of tertiary education and last I check only adults who are capable of discerning rights and wrongs are allowed to study in tertiary institutions. I would concur that if this offence happened in secondary schools there should be a 2nd chance due to (perceived) immaturity of students at those age, but beyond that I don't think there should be any excuse.
Actually, it does matter whether he is an ace student or a lazy bum. Otherwise, we do not need judges, DPPs or defence lawyers. Just key into a computer and let it churn out a sentence.

Also, of course we can get rid of stern and conditional warnings, and make it a rule everyone above x age must be prosecuted for all crimes regardless of the facts of each case. Somehow, I don't think many people will like where it leads us.

And I disagree with expulsion from NUS. If you are saying NUS should expel him, then you are also saying that no other IHL should admit him. Why should it be ok for him to be in NTU, or SMU or the University of Timbuctoo if it is not ok for him to be in NUS? In other words, you are saying he should not be allowed to continue any higher education. Otherwise, it is just passing the buck from NUS to some other IHL.
It's not so plain and simple. Heard of 法 vs 情 Justice vs Mercy? I fully agree with pirate that it DOES matter whether he is an ace student, though sloth is inapplicable in this case. There're many mitigating circumstances to look at as you can see from the latest police statement. Defence could highlight so and so's PSLE T-score, the schools the person attended, mental impairment, family issues, etc. Not jk, but won't identify the cases.

And then there's the prosecutorial discretion conferred by the Constitution on the AG. This is exercised by a team of officers, under the close supervision of the chief prosecutors of various divisions. The latter act in accordance with the direction of the SG and the AG. Every decision to charge an individual for an offence is taken carefully and after consideration by min 2 officers of the AGC, with min 1 separate higher level of review in all cases.

Someone asked if there's any diff in commiting the offence on campus or off. Each case is considered on its own merits, at 'a nuaced level'. While like cases are treated alike, there may be cases where two offenders with apparently similar levels of culpability or who offended in apparently similar circumstances are charged with different offences. A lot of factors are carefully weighed by the AG in determining the charges to prefer. To ensure consistency, internal prosecution guidelines are referred to before determining the appropriate course of action. But these guidelines are not published to the public and the AG does not generally explain the basis for his prosecution decisions. That is why someone could not find much info on similar conditional warning instances when he googled.

phtthp
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
Posts: 18334
Joined: Fri Jan 21,
Total Likes:166

Re: Guy who filmed NUS undergrad showering.....

Post by phtthp » Wed Apr 24, 2019 1:09 am

-
Last edited by phtthp on Fri May 03, 2019 3:30 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Dreamaurora
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
Posts: 2121
Joined: Thu Apr 07,
Total Likes:37

Re: Guy who filmed NUS undergrad showering.....

Post by Dreamaurora » Wed Apr 24, 2019 8:16 am

Yes, as I mentioned earlier judges do consider mitigating factors in handing out lesser sentence. But I should not be surprised that there will be those who advocate meritocracy as one of these mitigating factors in this meritocracy-driven country.

If you are suggesting that a person who has an Ivy-league education should get much lesser punishment as compared to an ITE grad when the crime committed is the same, then this is a very slippery slope that I hope the justice system does not go into.

lee_yl
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
Posts: 7383
Joined: Mon Jan 18,
Total Likes:104

Re: Guy who filmed NUS undergrad showering.....

Post by lee_yl » Wed Apr 24, 2019 8:17 am

.zeit wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 9:56 pm
The EH bathroom doors already extend to the floor.
Image

[url=https://postimg.cc/c6zfxkJZ]Image[/url
From the pics you attached, there seems to be a relatively big gap between the doors and floor. That’s how Nic slipped in his hp? Then that gap should be redesigned.

If someone who claim he was heavily drunk, can make his way into the female toilet and take out his HP to film, that means something is wrong with the security. Or his mind is still very clear, not as drunken as claimed.

Btw, how long did he join GE? In the few months during his suspension by Uni?


MrsKiasu
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
Posts: 11488
Joined: Mon Jul 18,
Total Likes:33

Re: Guy who filmed NUS undergrad showering.....

Post by MrsKiasu » Wed Apr 24, 2019 8:48 am

on being drunk..dunno how many levels are there..brain will still be conscious and can think right even though cant walk straight :? anyone tried before brain unconscious of surroundings but can do so many things physically.. sleep walking?

Cloud Cloud
BrownBelt
BrownBelt
Posts: 617
Joined: Mon Aug 28,

Re: Guy who filmed NUS undergrad showering.....

Post by Cloud Cloud » Wed Apr 24, 2019 8:52 am

I think he got off too lightly...should taxpayers continue to subsidise his tertiary education???

sparks
BrownBelt
BrownBelt
Posts: 711
Joined: Wed Apr 06,

Re: Guy who filmed NUS undergrad showering.....

Post by sparks » Wed Apr 24, 2019 9:44 am

So what if he is a university grad? It is how you contribute to society that counts. Academic achievements should not be a key consideration in the outcome imo. As what Josephus Tan, the lawyer, commented, I do agree with him that the culprit should be prosecuted in court and judged. If case is handled in court, it may have better outcome.

pirate
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
Posts: 4711
Joined: Mon Jul 02,
Total Likes:173

Re: Guy who filmed NUS undergrad showering.....

Post by pirate » Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:54 pm

sparks wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 9:44 am
So what if he is a university grad? It is how you contribute to society that counts. Academic achievements should not be a key consideration in the outcome imo. As what Josephus Tan, the lawyer, commented, I do agree with him that the culprit should be prosecuted in court and judged. If case is handled in court, it may have better outcome.
Even if the case is prosecuted in court, he would be given a fine of $1,000-$2,000. This is the starting benchmark for a section 509 peeping Tom offence. See the recent High Court case of GCO v Public Prosecutor, the judgment of which is still on the Supreme Court website.

And in case you are wondering about the handphone, "the position is that a custodial sentence is not warranted as a starting point even where the aggravating factor of the use of technology is present". The "factors of planning and premeditation were more crucial in the sentencing analysis".

This is a High Court appeal case, where the Judge also referred to another High Court appeal case. A District Judge hearing a prosecution would be bound by these authorities, and would need strong reasons to say why this case is different.

From the police and AGC's point of view, a conditional warning in lieu of prosecution for a $1,000-$2,000 fine is not inappropriate. Contrary to what people are claiming, jail would actually be out of the norm.

This is also why I question the design of the shower cubicles in NUS halls or residence. I just quote from the judgment in GCO v PP:
All he had to do was walk into the toilet and find the relevant cubicle. The facts as described in the Statement of Facts do not suggest that he had given a great deal of thought to planning his entry; instead, the facts appear to suggest that he acted on a whim "when he heard someone showering inside the toilet".
There is something wrong with the design when anyone can just walk in on a whim and place a hp under the door of the shower cubicle. An entry card system and smaller gaps under the cubicle door so that a hp cannot be just pushed in would necessitate the peeping Tom to giving more thought to planning his entry, which would trigger a jail sentence.

sparks
BrownBelt
BrownBelt
Posts: 711
Joined: Wed Apr 06,

Re: Guy who filmed NUS undergrad showering.....

Post by sparks » Wed Apr 24, 2019 3:29 pm

pirate wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:54 pm
From the police and AGC's point of view, a conditional warning in lieu of prosecution for a $1,000-$2,000 fine is not inappropriate. Contrary to what people are claiming, jail would actually be out of the norm.
This is different from what I've come across : https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/ ... s-need-not

"The criminal lawyers noted that it is uncommon for even a first-time offender to be let off with just a conditional warning for a sexual voyeurism offence, which would come under the Penal Code's Section 509, which criminalises words or gestures intended to "insult the modesty" of women.

Mr Josephus Tan, founder of Invictus Law Corporation, said: "A first-time offender for Section 509 Penal Code offence should generally be looking at a sentence of two to four weeks in jail per charge. This NUS case seems unusual as he was let off with a conditional stern warning without going through the judicial process at the first instance.

"Ultimately, the sentence imposed by courts varies from a fine to jail term to probation, but in the last few years jail has been the norm for such cases.

Mr Tan added: "Regardless of the sentence to be imposed, it would be appropriate for the offender in this case to be dealt with by our courts and a conditional stern warning could then be contemplated by the prosecution thereafter based on mitigating factors.

"A conditional stern warning is seen as a slap on the wrist in our criminal justice system.""

I really do NOT hope that the male student would go to jail. However, given the grave nature of his action, the manner in which such incidents are handled must change so that our young girls (not all girls are like Monica!) feel assured & safe. It is too bad that he is the one to set precedence for change but this is all for the greater good of the society.

I don't know if it will help if he had come out to sincerely apologise for the incident & ask for forgiveness from victim in public?

The internet is a scary place. What is online is there forever....

I must also add that I feel for his parents. :sad:

Post Reply