Showing posts with label Malaysia.Judiciary. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Malaysia.Judiciary. Show all posts

Friday, August 10, 2012

Judgement Not For The Laymen

Hantu Laut

Before I proceed further let's visit one very angry Malaysian here. His fury, a judgment pronounced by, no less, the President of the Court of Appeal on a rape case that have sent ripples across the nation.

Many of you, particularly, those in management or stakeholders in businesses, must have read the book "Peter Principle" by Dr Laurence Peters and Raymond Hull. 

I read the book in the early seventies when I was still a young man just starting out in the business world. I had, in my later years, the opportunity to witness "Peter Principle" inherent in my own organisation. People getting promoted to their level of incompetence.

Out of their ubiquitous observation they have come to a conclusion that in almost every organisation "employees tend to rise to their level of incompetence"

How the judiciary promotes its judges and what criteria used I have no idea.

I will not question the judgement as there may be other factors and circumstances that we are not privy to. 

However, the comment by the judge or ground for judgement is discomfiting to the layman.

Should a famous person be reprieved from punishment under the law? Was his age and his whole future the ground for such leniency?

Malaysia have had many statutory rape cases and many of those charged had been given long imprisonment. 

Recently, squeaky clean Singapore had a child prostitution scandal that rocked the nation and shaken its political and economic elite. Paid sexual favours from a child prostitute by businessmen, bankers, civil servants and uniformed officers.

Among those charged was prominent Singapore socialite Howard Shaw, the grandson of Runme Shaw who was 41 and had 2 daughters from his previous marriage when the crime was committed, the girl was under 18. Actually she was 5 months short of her legal age. 

It would be considerable feat to tell the difference between 17 years 7 months old and an 18-year old.

Howard Shaw was given 3 months sentence but is out on bail pending appeal. Story here.

The Singapore case may not be exactly the same as the Noor Afizal's case. He committed the crime when he was 18 and the girl 13. Malaysia's age of consent for sex is 16.

Has the judge erred in his judgement ?


Well, if I am not wrong the prosecution can still appeal to the Federal Court.


Read here one very angry woman, always angry with the government and the judiciary. 

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Correct,Correct,Correct

Hantu Laut

"Correct,correct,correct" and now it's "Looks like me, sounds like me".

Can you get anyone with worse antics than this slithering sycophant,a Mr Tag Along and a denizen of the legal fraternity with a magic wand that can influence the appointment of judges.He was so powerful he can actually tell the ex-Prime Minister who to appoint to the bench.

In the controversial video tape he described the ex-PM as "Being the old man, he is 76 years old, he gets whispers everywhere, and then you don’t whisper, he get taken away by the other side. But, now the PM is very alert he because every time he gets letters from Tan Sri Dzaiddin, he calls Tengku Adnan, he says discuss with Vincent, come and discuss".

Who is Vincent? Was he a special rapporteur officially appointed by the government to advise the ex-PM on appointment of judges?

If what he said about the ex-PM was true, than it is most disgraceful and a shocking news to the nation.Judges are appointed to dispense justice to all and sundry and not to be subservient to anyone in particular.Judges have no masters,they are masters of their own .They are expected to adhere to the rules of justice and listen to their conscience, not to anyone else including the Prime Minister.

Was Vincent Tan a close confidant of the ex-PM? It looked obviously so, if we go by what that bragging power brokering creep revealed in the video.For the ex-PM to tell Tengku Adnan to discuss state matters of the highest importance with a man who has nothing to do with matters of government, one can only assume such relationship did exist, unless, that slimy bragging creep was name-dropping just to impress his audience.

It was no coincidence that in 1993, Lingam was Vincent Tan's lawyer in a law suit against M.G.G.Pillai, a journalist who has since died.Tan brought a defamation suit against him and was awarded a substantial amount, unprecedented in the legal history of defamation suits in this country.It was also no coincidence that the damages awarded by the Federal Court was presided over by a team of judges headed by Eusoffe Chin.

In the latest episode, the 'Correct,Correct,Correct' and 'Looks like me,Sounds like me' has manifested into 'I cannot recollect'.

He told the commission."Without looking at the video, I cannot recollect the occasion. After looking at the video, I do not recollect. It has happened so long ago. Looking at the video, there is bottles of wine, whiskey or brandy and 7-Up. I would have had one too many drinks. That was a drinking session, a celebration, a party. I must have had one too many (and) it is more than six years ago. I cannot remember".

"It looks like me. You can ask the question 100 times, I will still give you the same answer".He must have assumed every members of the commission are idiots, to be able to take this kind of crap coming from him, a man void of any dignity and shame.

This legal clown has turned the commission into a circus and tried to fool everyone with intoxicated lapse of memory as his excuse not to remember whom he spoke to on the phone.

This fool and his folly will eventually put a noose around his own neck.A shameless and stinking piece of crap,undignified and fits for the sewer.

Is this the kind of man some of our judges and leaders kept company with?

LATEST FROM LINGAM'S COURTROOM ANTICS.

Now he admits being a bullshitter and a braggart.He is king in his own house and can talk whatever rubbish he wishes.Below are some of his oratorical skills.

1.“I can choose whatever topic I like. I can even pretend to talk to President Bush if I like,”

2.“That (conversation) was in my house. That was in the privacy of my room. My house is my castle. I am the king there. I can talk whatever rubbish in my house as long as I don’t get drunk outside and misbehave,”

3.“Even if I did say it and I am sorry to use this word but I was bullshitting and bragging,”

4.“No, no, no, my learned commissioner, you didn’t get me right. I said it looks like me, it sounds like me. I didn’t said it’s not me. I don’t want to say it’s 100 percent me because the authenticity of the clip has to be established,”

5.“The tickets are separate tickets with separate number. They were just stapled together and anybody can staple them [...] I don’t know who did it, I have not seen it, you have to call the maker who did it,”

6.“I changed my prepaid numbers very often when I lost my mobile phone. I also change my house phone number very often because there are many prank calls to me and my maid at late hours,”

Read Sophie's World anecdotal story on this.