"Never speak ill of the dead" was what my parents told me when I was young.Obviously, not many parents told their children this simple social etiquette.
It exists in every culture.Courtesies of polite society demand that we don't speak ill of the dead.No matter how bad the man had been in his living years it is social norm and good manners that we don't utter anything bad about the dead.As they always say the dead can't defend themselves.Of all people who should know this better, I guess, must be our learned judges.
It is shocking that this learned man who held the honourable post of a judge before can in the most uncouth manner and without slightest hint of guilt severely denigrates his former colleague who passed away recently.
This heartless creature who think he is the smartest man around because he was a judge before has no compassion and care not about the feelings of the family of the deceased.
To err is human.Many judges have made wrong judgements.Not every judge is as infallible as NH Chan.Even if Anwar was innocent and Augustine Paul wrongly convicted him, should he be condemned the way this former judge did.
He said Augustine Paul didn't give Anwar a fair trail?Was he on the bench together with him or sat in the courtroom throughout the trail absorbing all the evidences and making his own conclusion that the judgment was a sham or is he just repeating what Anwar and all his supporters are saying? I am innocent, it was a trumped-up charges.Because Anwar says so, the whole world must say so.Yes, he is innocent,it was a trumped-up charges.Very simple,as they say rumours repeated many time become the truth.
From his article he makes himself out as the only honest judge this country ever had, even criminals showed him respect and shook his hands for sending them to prison.He further revile the judiciary, hitting them below the belt because he knows they can't response to his crock of shit and by his denigration that " there are a few good judges left but they are few and far between as can be seen by the antics of the main body of judges in the cases of the Perak crisis". What he meant is that the whole judiciary is rotten to the core.
If you have hard evidences of corrupt judges and you claimed to be a man of conscience and one that have never erred why don't you present these evidences to the MACC instead of writing with ambiguity in your numerous articles knowing none of the judges can response to your allegations.
I don't care if Malaysiakini and Malaysian Insider think highly of your learned opinion, your glorified past and think your articles deserved to come into public domain.I am shocked with the aberration, for a man of your status and honour.
I honestly find your writing most distasteful and cowardly.
Below is his masterpiece:
About my brother judge Augustine Paul
When the infamous Judge Jeffreys died ignominiously in 1689 at the age of 41 in the Tower of London where he was imprisoned, no one in freedom loving England mourned his death.
augustine paul" width="64" height="64">Judge Jeffreys died in obscurity as a judge. But his name will forever be remembered in infamy for his part as the judge in the Bloody Assize. Likewise, the name of judge Augustine Paul (left) will remain in obscurity as a judge, but his name will be remembered as a bad and evil judge because of his monstrous behaviour on the bench when he tried former deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim.
This obnoxious man never gave Anwar a fair trial. William Shakespeare once wrote in one of his plays, "The evil that men do lives after them": Julius Caesar, Act 3, scene 2.
There is another quotation which tells us that an unjust judge is unfit to be called a judge. The quotation fits Augustine to a T. It reads, "When the judge is unjust, he is no longer a judge but a transgressor": Giosue` Borsi in 'A Soldier's Confidence with God', The Macmillan Treasury of Relevant Quotations. Read more..