14-year-old jumps to his death after unaccompanied police interrogation for Molest

[kuasimi]

20160228 MOE (acting) minister only knows how to copy and paste, ignores real issues
February 28, 2016 by Phillip Ang


https://likedatosocanmeh.wordpress.c...s-real-issues/


https://www.facebook.com/TREmeritus/


(Turning on his laptop) Arumugam: Here we go again – another jiak-liow-bee minister got idea from Japan and Taiwan for students to do area cleaning in schools. Million dollar paid to learn copy and paste approach.

Ah Kow: Aiyah what you expect. Acting MOE minister Ng Chee Meng was Chief of Defence Force, another army scholar. He maybe quite impress with area cleaning during army and air force days la. So his first contribution to MOE: area cleaning. Ha ha. Guess what is his second contribution?

Ahmad: Don’t know leh. Maybe some kind of military ranking system in schools? HOD given title from captain to colonel? Principal is one-/two-/three-stars general? Introduce detention barracks?

Ah Kow: This 3-star general don’t play play OK. Generals in other countries work si peh hard to rise through the ranks but stars can multiply like nobody business on our generals shoulders. Can study OK leow.

Aru: PAP system is a big joke. All his life in the military and just because he is yes man, he can immediately become a minister. He knows nothing about education. In fact he will want to continue with the status quo.

Ah Kow: Ya hor. The system is perfect for him so why change a perfect system? When he join the army, top post already guarantee if he never cock up big time and master only one word: “yes”. When he was junior officer, so many superior also sa-kah him he must think highly of himself. Our education system surely damn good one. Change for what?

Ahmad: Some more not real minister, only acting one. Ha ha.

Aru: He is not qualified to be minister so now only on probation. But sure pass one. Then when become minister, mainstream media can heap praises on him one more time.

Ah Kow: I also know he like to joke and tell everyone we got powerful weapon can “one shot, one kill”. He cannot tell difference between training and real war meh?

Ahmad: Same as SPF la, also got weapons but what happened when they need it?

Ah Kow: Aiyah, you don’t know meh. Singapore everything need black and white. If SOP never say can use weapon, book smart leaders will just follow law. I not say must kill foreigners but one warning shot the rioters run back to India already. So got weapon for what?

Aru: The real issue at MOE is a lot of teachers are quitting because of work overload. And it’s not teaching but admin and other non teaching work. A lot of passionate teachers have left but Ng of course still in the dark. This joker’s priority: area cleaning!

Ahmad: All they can think of is throwing money to increase salary but the real problem still not solved. (Sigh). Not everyone like PAP and affiliates so money face all the time la.

Aru: The other issue is Benjamin Lim’s suicide. The case did not require Ben to be arrested by 5 police officers in school and the school failed to protect him. Worse, after Ben’s interview at the police station, the bloody school counselor informed his parents that he was not permitted to attend Sec 3 camp.

Ah Kow: You sure 100% we can blame the government?

Aru: Common sense la. Would Ben have committed suicide if:

1 5 police officers did not show up at school to arrest him?
2 He was held without an adult for more than 4 hours by the police?
3 His school did not release him to the police?
4 His school had allowed him to attend Sec 3 camp?

Ahmad: I can say for sure he would not have killed himself.

Aru: One life has been lost but MOE (not just acting but acting blur) minister has remained silent after 1 month. Where is the leadership or maybe it’s leadershit?

Ahmad: Our system is a dam sia sway one. Got problems ministers become deaf and dumb. Everyone only know how to claim credit.

Ah Kow: Of course la, this problem not their problem. If something happen to future white horses, you think need to go to police station meh? You think the school principal dare to release ministers’ children to the police? Everything not affect them and wealthy people, they bo chap.

Aru: Now the government wants to wayang in parliament: all the questions have nothing to do with accountability. PAP is never wrong. It is the people who are wrong because they are stupid to vote for such a system. Most people can’t see they have been divided by PAP and regain their eyesight only after something bad has happened to them. A country of book smart morons have no empathy for the victims of PAP system.

Ah Kow: K, bro. Now I understand how our system kill Benjamin Lim. I promise to educate all my brothers and sisters through social media.

Aru: Thanks bro. Anything you can help in our no-justice system will not bring Ben back but at least provide some closure for his dad, mum and sister.

[kuasimi]

Lawyer questions different treatment

Posted on December 10, 2008 Written by admin


Law not applied equally to rich and poor in compounding of offences, says Subhas Anandan


http://www.ngejay.com/?p=1480



Wednesday • December 10, 2008

TODAY link

Conrad raj
[email protected]

CRIMINAL lawyer Subhas Anandan wonders if there is one law for the rich and another for the poor.

Writing in the latest issue of Probono, the official publication of the Association of Criminal Lawyers of Singapore (ACLS), Mr Anandan pointed to stark discrepancies in the treatment of compounding of offences.



He cited several cases where the courts refused to allow the accused to privately settle with the victims, apparently in the public interest.

For instance, the victim of a road rage incident had accepted an ex gratia payment after being assaulted by a certain Mr Timothy Chua. However, the magistrate withheld the composition as he felt that would be going against the strict policy on road rage incidents, a view upheld by then Chief Justice Yong Pung How.

The matter went to trial and Mr Chua was fined the maximum $1,000, but the victim lost the compensation of $8,000.

Mr Anandan, who has just been elected for another two years as ACLS’ president, pointed out that the Subordinate Courts very rarely overruled the objection of a public prosecutor to compound an offence.

“This happens so often that one cannot be faulted for thinking that the decision to compound a case depends on the public prosecutor even though there is no mention of him in Section 199 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code,” he wrote.

On the other hand, when the accused is well-off or a professional, the offender is allowed to compound the offence with no objection from the prosecutors. Those thus let off cited by Mr Anandan included a dentist, a doctor and the wife of Venture Corporation head Wong Ngit Liong, who slapped an air stewardess during a flight.

The questions to be asked regarding the latter instance included: “Why was public interest ignored in these cases?” Why was there no objection from the public prosecutor and why didn’t the court use its judicial power and withhold consent, Mr Anandan asked.

“The authorities concerned must answer these questions and explain why these people were allowed to compound their offences. If no satisfactory answers are forthcoming, you cannot blame the man in the street for thinking that there is one law for the rich and one for the poor,” Mr Anandan said.

In the same issue, the newsletter’s editorial noted that while its members generally enjoyed an excellent working relationship with the judges, “there are some judicial attitudes that are troubling”.

As an example, it cited a District Judge who, before he granted probation, told the accused that he was lucky the prosecution was not objecting to the probation.

“Probono is concerned. An accused person is granted probation by the Court based on the facts, the law, recommendations of the Probation Report and the conscience of the judge. The grant of probation had nothing to do with whether the Prosecution objected or not,” the editorial said.

It also lambasted judges who made lawyers wait unnecessarily for hours in court before hearing their cases.

“Counsel’s time is also valuable. Probono feels that it is time that counsel’s time is respected. When the judge finally appears, after having kept counsel and the public waiting, he does not apologise for being late. Why such boorish behaviour?”



Filed Under: Media Articles

[99099]

TS is straying left. Think you are the one NOT willing to rest even though you are not the party involved. I think sooner or later you meet same fate if you dun listen and stop.

[Sword_74]

Think this forum is for the small head rather than the big head....

[kuasimi]

Originally Posted by 99099

TS is straying left. Think you are the one NOT willing to rest even though you are not the party involved. I think sooner or later you meet same fate if you dun listen and stop.

If you dislike this thread, you may skip this thread. Nobody is forcing you to read this thread. This is the spirit of any Internet Forums.

This case is already of public interest, why public cannot discuss it?
Only Government can discuss this case?
Is it as secretive as JFK's assassination?
Are you from SPF, School, Government or PAP?
Please enlighten.

[kuasimi]

Government should choose engagement over confrontation with TOC
By The Independent - March 4, 2016


http://theindependent.sg/government-...tion-with-toc/


By Ghui

Now that The Online Citizen (TOC) has been publicly named and shamed by Minister Shanmugam over the Benjamin Lim tragedy, some have gone on to speculate as to why the government has not engaged with TOC.

PN Balji in his recent article has made an educated assumption and suggested that the lack of traction between the government and TOC is because “the government does not see TOC as a “friendly” website like, for example, The Straits Times. It is one of a couple of websites that has not had an interview with a Minister, yet another indication of where TOC stands in the government’s popularity scales.”

I cannot agree with this astute presumption more. From its lack of engagement with TOC to it gazetting TOC as a political organisation to the raft of online media reforms, the message that TOC is not the government media outlet of choice couldn’t be more apparent. Yet, it cannot have escaped the government’s observations that TOC is undoubtedly popular, which begs the question of why the government does not see fit to engage the oldest existing website in Singapore’s social-political, and instead appeared to have done everything possible to limit its resources and reach.

Perhaps we can begin with ascertaining the meaning of a “friendly” website. To me, a “friendly” website would be a website that seeks to publish facts and well thought out commentaries without favouritism.

While I do not possess sufficient information to pronounce TOC as such, I would not classify TOC as necessarily unfriendly to the government. There have certainly been occasions where TOC has published articles that have been favourable to the government. Based on my years of reading and writing for the website, my experience has been that it has always attempted to show both sides of the story.

Why then has the government given TOC the cold shoulder? Could it perhaps be that they have a very different idea as to what constitutes friendly? Are they only interested in engaging with sites that will only publish their versions of events without further question or investigation? If so, is that approach still relevant in our digital age?

Indeed, some very learned individuals have observed that with the past two general elections, the level of political awareness has only increased and Singaporeans are now clamouring for more alternative voices in government. And there is no stronger proof of this than the electoral reforms proposed by PM Lee to ensure at least 12 opposition candidates in Parliament. In response, shouldn’t the government also embrace the desire for the same diversity and have a more open mind towards alternative media outlets?

I can understand that the government would have concerns with websites that seek to needlessly incite violence and tension just for the sake of it, or media outlets whose sole aim is to bring the government down without rhyme or reason. Given that TOC has attempted to reach out to the government over the Benjamin Lim case, the government should have been assured that TOC is not one such website. While it most certainly is not a website that will simply be a mouthpiece for the government, I don’t see it as a website that will set out to irresponsibly tarnish the government’s reputation, if all it seeks is both sides of the story.

Our government has been in power for over 50 years. Given its many accolades of which we are constantly reminded of, surely they don’t need to have an overly compliant media that can only report their version of events? Surely an independent website giving the mainstream media some healthy competition is a boon? Couldn’t the government also glean some useful information from engaging with an entity which will not simply kowtow?

Besides, aren’t we all adults who have to learn to work with people we may not always like or agree with? Such is life! The government may not like TOC but is that really the point? Whether it likes it or not, TOC is considered to be a credible alternative news outlet by the online community. The online community grows by the minute and these are people who are or who will one day be part of the voting public. Surely engagement with TOC would be a positive forum for the government to give its side of the story and challenge TOC directly on its version of events?

Perhaps the government does not want to legitimise TOC by engaging with it; but that’s just unrealistic and ignores the fact that TOC has already earned a high level of legitimacy among its sizeable readership, who know what TOC can deliver and are comfortable with it. Indeed, there is a good chance that Minister Shanmugam’s latest remarks has only cemented this credibility further.

This is something that the government must accept. I don’t know enough to say whether or not TOC’s reporting is always spot on, but I do know that the quickest way to dispel any rumours on the part of the government is to publicly engage with TOC and discredit it point by point.

It is the failure to engage, not what TOC actually publishes, that would cost the government its public reputation, even if it has absolutely no desire to cover up anything.

[kuasimi]

“Ah Hui, is everything alright at your end?” Benjamin Lim’s dad’s moving message to his dead son
By The Independent - March 4, 2016


http://theindependent.sg/ah-hui-is-e...-his-dead-son/




http://www.thebeautifulmemories.com/...n-lim-jun-hui/


In a web-page dedicated to his late son, Benjamin Lim’s father wrote a moving message to his late 14-year-old son. The father recalled his son telling him that he liked a girl in the neighbourhood, but said that he did not believe that his son would molest anyone. He hopes that the Coroner’s Inquiry will clear his son’s name.

“Ah Hui, is everything alright at your end? What are you doing now? Did you receive those latest gadgets we sent to you? There are those games that you wanted so much but we didn’t buy for you because they were so expensive… and the computer that you have been asking for… are they useful to you at wherever you are now?

Don’t worry about us, everyone in the family is alright. We miss you a lot… if you are able to read this message, do come into our dreams and let us know that you are alright too…

And ya, before I forget, the Ministers are saying that you molested a girl? They are saying you followed the girl to her block and went into the lift with her, and molested her?

Now it rings a bell… I recalled you said there was this girl staying at neighboring block, you like her and that she is cute… Is she the one? You couldn’t have molest her, we do not believe you will do such thing.

The Ministers said there is CCTV recording in the lift… perhaps this CCTV recording can eventually help to clear your name. Daddy will seek justice for you.

Let’s us wait patiently for the CI, let us not speculate further… People wrote to us, saying very nasty things about you… saying that you are a molester because the Minister mentioned in Parliament that you probably will receive nothing more than a warning. People jumped into conclusion that you are guilty… that you are now guilty of a crime that you may not even have committed!

But Ah Hui, daddy has taught you to be a reasonable person. What is right, we fight for it. What is wrong, we admit it. Do not point fingers at anyone for now, let the investigation be completed and let the judge do his findings.

All you need to know now is, we believe in you and we love you!”

[kuasimi]

Singapore government: TheOnlineCitizen to pay S$5,000 or shut down
By admin - March 4, 2016


http://statestimesreview.com/2016/03...-or-shut-down/


In response to social media theonlinecitizen’s extensive coverage on the teen suicide case which resulted in fallen ratings for the Singapore government, the Media Development Authority (MDA) is now getting the website to cough out S$5,000 it received in advertising fees it received in April 2015.

The advertiser was UK-based Monsoons Book Club who used the website’s platform to organise an essay competition. Using the advertiser’s foreign registration as an excuse, the MDA ruled that this is breaching the media censorship license rule.

Under Singapore’s media censorship license registration, local news media are not allowed to receive funding from foreign sources. In their official media statement, MDA said:

“TOC Ltd is registered under the Broadcasting (Class Licence) Notification as an “Internet content provider engaged in the propagation, promotion or discussion of political issues relating to Singapore”. As part of the registration, TOC had undertaken not to receive funding from foreign sources for the provision, management and/or operation of the website, except for bona fide commercial purposes.

TOC Ltd’s receipt of the advertising revenue from MBC is thus a clear breach of the licence conditions.

This is to ensure that foreign entities do not engage in domestic politics and to uphold the principle that domestic politics must remain a matter for Singapore and Singaporeans alone.”

The censorship law was enacted to deter the formation of alternative news sites which do not subject themselves to the same control under the government as the Singapore Press Holdings does.

TOC has 30 days to pay up S$5,000 or face a de-registration leading to a shut down. Earlier this week, Home Affairs and Law Minister K Shanmugam was chastising the website for publishing falsehoods with intent to mislead the public over the suicide case of Benjamin Lim. This MDA move is clearly politically-motivated.

[kuasimi]

https://www.facebook.com/TREmeritus/


https://www.facebook.com/STReview


https://www.facebook.com/TheIndependentSG


https://www.facebook.com/theonlinecitizen/


https://www.facebook.com/The-Alterna...8759327518739/


https://www.facebook.com/allsgstuff


https://www.facebook.com/Fabrication...97912132/?rc=p


https://www.facebook.com/The-Workers...5421570592834/


https://www.facebook.com/WPgrassroots/


http://wpcf.sg/


http://wpyouth.sg/


https://www.facebook.com/wpyouth/


https://www.facebook.com/aljuniedcommunity


https://www.facebook.com/hougangsmc

[kuasimi]

Yahoo News Singapore: "Virtually zero jobs were created for locals in 2015"


http://forums.$$$$$$$$$$$$.com.sg/ea...a-5316028.html

https://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/ch...inkId=21913612

Overall employment growth in Singapore dropped drastically in 2015. This chart from Citi shows that only 31,800 jobs were created for the entire year, a far cry from the 130,100 jobs created in 2014. And out of these 31,000 new jobs, virtually zero was for locals.
This caused job redundancies to jump to its highest level since the Global Financial Crisis in the fourth quarter. The poor numbers suggest that there is sluggish demand for higher-wage and cyclical jobs, Citi said.
“Further deterioration in the labour market may be of concern to policymakers. A continued moderation in unit labour costs in 4Q15 suggests wage pressures on core inflation may be milder than earlier anticipated,” Citi said.

Is this the only case that parents managed to sue Mindef successfully?

http://forums.$$$$$$$$$$$$.com.sg/ea...y-5315549.html

By Crystal Chan

THEIR household income is just $2,000. So how, their friends asked them, can they take on the Government?

You will lose, their friends said. And you will be worse off because of the costs.

'It was a nerve-racking experience,' said Mr Tan, of taking on the Ministry of Defence.

Their son, Chia Wee, had become an invalid after he was found unconscious while he was in National Service

He was their hope. He was to have gone to university and supported them when he graduated.

Mr Tan said in Mandarin: 'My son began NS as a healthy soldier but he came out a vegetable. He used to jog and do standing broad jumps every day. Now, he's like a baby.'

When four years of talks with Mindef and the Attorney-General's Chambers came to naught, the couple sued Mindef for compensation - and took it all the way to High Court.

On 16 Jan, the Tans' dogged determination paid off when the High Court ruled that Chia Wee, now 26, was entitled to compensation.

'Many people have told us that we're very brave to sue the Government,' Madam Hor, a bank teller, said in Mandarin, 'especially when we're not rich. But I believe anyone in our position would have done the same.

'Some people even told us we may lose the case as we were up against the Government and we'd have to pay costs if we lost.

'We're not greedy. Going to court was really a last resort and we're really grateful to our lawyer. Till today, our lawyer has not charged us for his work.'

Their lawyer, Dr Lau Teik Soon, is a former People's Action Party Member of Parliament for Serangoon Gardens.

Looking at photos of Chia Wee in happier times, Mr Tan, who is unemployed, sighed: 'He had hoped to go to UniSIM to study business and support us after he graduated.

'He was enthusiastic about NS despite being a storeman. He obeyed instructions without complaint and always smiled when he left for the camp.

'Every day, we'd buy him supper so he could have his favourite burgers when he came home.'

Shocked

Chia Wee, a business diploma holder from Temasek Polytechnic, had told his parents he could do a variety of jobs with a business degree.

Mr Tan said: 'Now, he can only stare at us when we visit him.


The Tan family, (from left) Chia Wee, Madam Hor Hong Kiow,
Mr Tan Kian Lee and their daughter Chia Min (in front).
'We have accepted that he'll never be able to look after us. At least, we'll get some compensation so we can care for him.'

The couple's ordeal began when the Singapore Armed Forces called with the bad news that Chia Wee was discovered unconscious at the foot of his three-storey barracks at Seletar East Camp.

He was found at 6pm on 3 Aug 2005.

Mr Tan recalled: 'I was so shocked that I could barely stand. My daughter, Chia Min, had to support me.'

The tragedy affected Chia Min so much that she did badly for her O levels that year, scoring 29 points for her best five subjects.

She re-sat for her O levels in 2006 and scored 15 points, qualifying for polytechnic courses.

Mr Tan and Madam Hor sought an explanation from Mindef but details were sketchy as there were no witnesses.

One of Mr Tan's friends, who lives in Pasir Ris, took him to a meet-the-people's session with Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean in November 2005.

Mr Tan said: 'My friend spoke on my behalf and one of Mr Teo's assistants wrote a letter. Within 10 days, Mindef replied, saying it was investigating.'

In April 2006, Mindef officials met Mr Tan, informing him they did not know what led to Chia Wee's tragedy as there were no witnesses. The ministry offered to give Mr Tan $500 a month for five years to help him care for Chia Wee at home.

Mindef also said it would not provide additional compensation, claiming its checks showed Chia Wee was not hurt in the line of duty.

Not knowing what to do, Mr Tan delayed discharging his son, who remains in a step-down facility at Tan Tock Seng Hospital (TTSH).

Why didn't he just accept the monthly compensation of $500?

Mr Tan said: 'I wouldn't get anything after five years and my son needs lifelong care. I was also worried that if I accepted this offer, it would mean I couldn't pursue legal action against Mindef.'

In March 2007, Mindef stopped paying for Chia Wee's hospitalisation after having paid more than $30,000 for his medical treatment.

Worried

Mr Tan said: 'I took that to mean Mindef was absolving itself of any liability. That's unfair because my son got injured in camp, not while he was off-duty.

'At that point, my wife and I considered legal action as it was the only chance we had of getting compensation.

'It's not that we want to leave Chia Wee in TTSH permanently, but we can't afford to hire a nurse to care for him at home.'

Madam Hor's colleague recommended Dr Lau to the couple and he, together with Ms Rajvant Kaur, represented them for free.

In August 2007, the Tans had a meeting with the Attorney-General's Chambers to resolve the dispute, but to no avail.

Dr Lau told The New Paper: 'We were hoping to settle the issue of liability amicably but it wasn't a meeting of two minds.'

Soon after that, the Tans sued.

Mr Tan said: 'I spent two hours reading my 40-page affidavit every day. My English is limited and I was worried of slipping up while testifying.'

After a four-day hearing last month, Justice Tay Yong Kwang ruled in the Tans' favour.

Mindef has not appealed against the verdict.

Dr Lau told The New Paper that the next step is to assess the degree of Chia Wee's disability and, using Manpower Ministry guidelines, work out how much he should get.

Mr Tan said: 'We would have had to pay the A-G's costs if we had lost. It was a risk we had to take. But if we didn't take this step, we wouldn't get any compensation.

'Of course, we're happy to win. After such a long time, we finally got justice.'





They need to buy $3,000 bed for son

THE Tans have no proper bed of their own.

Now they will have to buy a motorised special bed costing $3,000 for their son.

The couple, who also have a daughter in polytechnic, live in a spartan three-room flat at Old Airport Road.

It is a flat that indicates their modest income.

The family sleep on mattresses on the floor instead of on beds.

Their living room has a sofa and two armchairs, but no coffee table.

Instead of Chia Wee supporting them in their old age, Mr Tan and Madam Hor will now have to care for him for the rest of his life.

They spend about $2,000 a year on their daughter's school fees.

They intend to use the compensation, which the court will assess at a later date, to hire a nurse to care for Chia Wee at home.

His vegetative state means he has to be fed through a tube and wear diapers all the time.

The Tans have decided against placing Chia Wee in a nursing home as it will cost between $1,200 and $1,800 a month.

Mr Tan said: 'If our son stays in a home, we'd have to spend money on transport to see him every day.

'I'm not working, so I can care for him at home. We hope to use the compensation money to buy diapers, milk and a proper bed for him.'

Affordable

Bendemeer Medical Marketing & Nursing Services, which provides training for home nursing, is willing to work out an affordable package for the Tans.

Its head nurse, who asked to be known as Ms Angie, said: 'We can train Mr Tan to change the diapers, clean him and top up the feeding tube.'

She added that Chia Wee's parents will need to acquire a nursing bed, the type used in hospitals, to prevent him from developing bedsores.

She explained: 'The nursing beds are motorised and have ripple mattresses which have an alternating pressure pump and a special air-mattress. These will boost blood circulation and prevent bedsores.'

Such beds cost around $3,000 but MsAngie said the company can source for donated beds from previous patients.

This story was first published in The New Paper.


http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne...23-123888.html

[kuasimi]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater

I’m sure by now many of you reading this would be familiar with the tragic tale of one Dominique Sarron Lee. Dom was taken from us just days after her 21st birthday back in 2012 during what should’ve been a routine army training exercise.

I first met Dom back in 2005 at the Singapore Sports School, we were both goofy teenagers from different worlds - he was a sprinter and I a golfer. We bonded over our shared love of Andrew Lloyd Webber’s classic musical “The Phantom Of The Opera” and would often prefer to communicate by hand written notes pinned on our dormitory study desks instead of text messages. He’s sign off “O.B” for Opera Boy and being a year older I’d end my notes with “O.M” for Opera Man.

We shared plenty of good times and laughs during our days at the Sports School and on a few rare occasions after we graduated when life took us down different paths. But we always reminded each other of the pact we made as teenagers - whoever outlives the other has to place a single red rose on the other’s final resting place each year until we were reunited beyond the pearly gates (just like the Phantom in The Phantom Of The Opera).

One night in 2012 we touched base with each other over the phone after what seemed like forever. We planned to head out the following week to shoot the breeze, reminisce and catch up at a watering hole somewhere in town.

“Take care bro, I’ll see you then”
“Will do bud, be safe”

That was the last I heard from Dom, we never did get that drink, he passed away the following afternoon.

It all seemed like some horrible, surreal nightmare. I can’t recall many details about the days that followed but the details that I do remember are forever etched in my mind - His younger brother Daryl singing a soulful rendition of Mr Big’s “To Be With You” by his casket, his mother wailing uncontrollably at his funeral service and his father’s last words to him over his open grave.

My point? Dominique Sarron Lee wasn’t just another face in the crowd, another statistic, another I/C number - he was a person. Dom was a son to Felicia and Matthew, a brother to Daryl and a loyal friend to all those who had the blessing of knowing him.

Which is why the events that transpired over the last 3 years have infuriated me so much...

It’s not the fact he’s gone, we can’t change that, it’s life and as we know, life isn’t always fair. (I buried a father I barely knew at the age of 7, I’ve come to understand that whether you like it or not, life has to go on).

It’s not even the fact that his untimely death was brought about by an negligent oversight and an unnecessary compromise in safety protocols. (again, we all make mistakes, some have greater, more lasting consequences than others but nonetheless as painful as it is to admit, we’re all human, we’re fallible)

No, what makes my blood boil is the blatant lack of respect the powers that be have had towards those who my dear friend left behind. Their failure to take responsibility for the actions that took a life that still had so much to live for has made me seriously question my faith in the system that we were all raised to respect and honor.

For 21 years his family raised him, cared for him and loved him. It was their responsibility to make sure that he wanted for nothing, that he grew up to be a respectable citizen and a good man. I think it’s safe to say they did their part.

They entrusted their son’s life to the SAF like so many others when his time came to serve and were promised the highest standards of safety for their child. What they got in return was a funeral and a void that can never be filled.

The lawsuit his family brought against the SAF has now been tossed out and what’s worse, the Lee’s have been ordered to foot the legal fees for the very people that caused their beloved son’s death in the first place!

Dear reader I humbly ask you - where’s the justice in that?

We’re not asking for those responsible to be scourged in a public square of lynched in a back alley, we just want closure for those who only have memories of their beloved Dominique to hold on to for the rest of their lives. He wasn’t just another name on the register or face on an 11B, he was a son, a brother and a friend.

This search of justice and closure is far from over. As long as those who loved him draw breath we will do whatever it takes to give him and his family peace, it’s our responsibility and one we won’t shirk in the same way those we trusted did.

And as for the defendant’s legal fees? Surely if we’ve got the funds to send a S$556 million dollar ERP satellite into space in 2020 it shouldn’t be that much of an issue.

While we’re at it, they could pay for my goddamn roses too.

I miss you O.B. Fret not, our search from justice is far from over. I promise you will find peace.

O.M

[kuasimi]

TOC Ltd to surrender $5k in funds to advertiser: MDA
By The Independent - March 4, 2016


http://theindependent.sg/toc-ltd-to-...dvertiser-mda/


The Media Development Authority of Singapore has demanded that The Opinion Collaborative Ltd, a social enterprise that was once managing funds for The Online Citizen, return funds that was given to it about a year ago as advertising revenue.

The funds, amounting to $5,000, were from Monsoons Book Club (MBC), another social enterprise registered in the UK.

“TOC Ltd has undertaken not to receive funding from foreign sources for the provision, management and/or operation of the website, The Online Citizen except for bona fide commercial purposes,” said MDA in its media release. “This is to ensure that foreign entities do not engage in domestic politics and to uphold the principle that domestic politics must remain a matter for Singapore and Singaporeans alone.”

The funds were given from one social enterprise to the other for the purpose of running an essay competition, “My Singapore, My Home”, as part of SG50.

TOC Ltd’s director and key contact person with MDA, Mr Howard Lee, was editor in charge of the competition and also the commentaries editor for TOC.

He was in contact with MBC’s director, former Singaporean Mr Tan Wah Piow, who contributed commentaries to TOC.

“Wah Piow is very supportive of TOC,” said Mr Lee. “He was keen to see what Singaporeans think about the future of Singapore, not to be reflective but more forward looking. We agreed on the title, and it was great to have him on our panel of judges.”

Each essay published on TOC as part of the competition carried a logo of MBC and a link to its website. TOC also ran a series of notifications on its Facebook page to call for participants of the competition, linking back to an announcement page, also with MBC’s logo on it.

But MDA said that “MBC Ltd is a non-commercial foreign entity incorporated in the United Kingdom. TOC Ltd’s receipt of the advertising revenue from MBC Ltd is thus a clear breach of the licence conditions.”

“Why now?”

Mr Lee said he could not remember exactly when the funds were transferred between the social enterprises, but “we submitted out declaration to MDA in April 2015.”

“It would have been ok if MDA were to ask us to return the funds within three months of April, as we have this clause in written agreement with them (MDA),” he said. “We really need to question why they are only bringing this up now.”

Mr Lee said that, in fact, MDA had another opportunity to raise issues with this funding when they met in November 2015 to discuss the delinking of TOC and the company.

“I told them in detail about the essay competition, where we placed MBC’s logo as advertising for the company,” he said. “They asked many questions, including whether I knew Wah Piow. If they had any issues then, I saw none of it.”

When asked if he was aware of the risk in taking up a foreign advertiser, Mr Lee said, “To me, it was an excellent opportunity for us to test a funding model not unlike how, say, a foreign bank might sponsor Mediacorp or SPH for an event or series of advertorials.”

“As far as I can see, we have been transparent and above board with MDA. We have no reason to believe that MBC was not a commercial entity. They are a social enterprise just like us, so why would they not be a commercial entity?”

Next steps

“I guess MDA dropped a bombshell on us,” said Mr Lee. “We have delinked from TOC not so long ago and are only just starting to raise funds for our projects. We have very limited funds, definitely nothing close to $5,000. This was so long ago, why would we still have this sum?”

He said the directors – including Tan Tee Seng, Lee Song Kwang and TOC’s chief editor Terry Xu – will have to set aside time to discuss this, and a decision will be announced in time. Current worries include projects that have overhead costs.

One such project is The Agora, an event space for civil society and book publishers to come together for the exchange of knowledge and ideas.

“If we have to fork out this amount, we just might have to close shop at The Agora,” said Mr Lee.

The small team, consisting of the directors and a few volunteers, will be hosting Dr Chee Soon Juan at its first Agora Book Club series on 10 March to discuss his book, Democratically Speaking.

What transpired

We recorded the following brief background of events from Mr Lee.

• 10 April 2015 – The Opinion Collaborative submitted a three-month statement of accounts to MDA, declaring funds received on behalf of TOC. Within that declaration, MBC was indicated as a foreign advertiser. The advertisement was received in relation to running an essay competition titled “My Singapore, My Future”, in celebration of SG50.
  
• September 2015 – The Opinion Collaborative informed MDA that the social enterprise and TOC plans to delink, with the view of ending the company’s obligation to report to MDA. All outstanding declaration of funds were also submitted.
  
• 6 October 2015 – The Opinion Collaborative wrote officially to MDA to confirm the delink with TOC. Mr Lee also declared that he was no longer an editor for TOC.
  
• 23 November 2015 – Upon request by MDA, Mr Lee met up with the regulator at their office for about an hour to answer MDA’s questions on the delinking and the amount given by MBC. Mr Lee left MDA with a forwarding email address for future contact, should MDA have further queries.
  
• 3 March 2016 – Mr Lee received a call from MDA at about 9pm, asking if he could meet the following day to answer more questions about the funding from MBC. As he was busy with work, he asked MDA to send no more than three questions, as he felt he has already gone through this matter sufficiently. MDA did not mention the return of funds.
  
• 4 March 2016 – Mr Lee received an email from MDA at about 3pm containing, not questions, but a letter demanding that the funds from Monsoons Book Club be returned.

Letter to TOC Ltd_4 Mar 16

http://theindependent.sg/wp-content/...d_4-Mar-16.pdf

[hongkongdoggy]

I thought you were banned by admin for political posts and now you out from jail and repeat your offence again! 真是死性难改！

[ComplainKing]

Originally Posted by kuasimi

20160228 MOE (acting) minister only knows how to copy and paste, ignores real issues
February 28, 2016 by Phillip Ang


https://likedatosocanmeh.wordpress.c...s-real-issues/


https://www.facebook.com/TREmeritus/


(Turning on his laptop) Arumugam: Here we go again – another jiak-liow-bee minister got idea from Japan and Taiwan for students to do area cleaning in schools. Million dollar paid to learn copy and paste approach.

Ah Kow: Aiyah what you expect. Acting MOE minister Ng Chee Meng was Chief of Defence Force, another army scholar. He maybe quite impress with area cleaning during army and air force days la. So his first contribution to MOE: area cleaning. Ha ha. Guess what is his second contribution?

Ahmad: Don’t know leh. Maybe some kind of military ranking system in schools? HOD given title from captain to colonel? Principal is one-/two-/three-stars general? Introduce detention barracks?

Ah Kow: This 3-star general don’t play play OK. Generals in other countries work si peh hard to rise through the ranks but stars can multiply like nobody business on our generals shoulders. Can study OK leow.

Aru: PAP system is a big joke. All his life in the military and just because he is yes man, he can immediately become a minister. He knows nothing about education. In fact he will want to continue with the status quo.

Ah Kow: Ya hor. The system is perfect for him so why change a perfect system? When he join the army, top post already guarantee if he never cock up big time and master only one word: “yes”. When he was junior officer, so many superior also sa-kah him he must think highly of himself. Our education system surely damn good one. Change for what?

Ahmad: Some more not real minister, only acting one. Ha ha.

Aru: He is not qualified to be minister so now only on probation. But sure pass one. Then when become minister, mainstream media can heap praises on him one more time.

Ah Kow: I also know he like to joke and tell everyone we got powerful weapon can “one shot, one kill”. He cannot tell difference between training and real war meh?

Ahmad: Same as SPF la, also got weapons but what happened when they need it?

Ah Kow: Aiyah, you don’t know meh. Singapore everything need black and white. If SOP never say can use weapon, book smart leaders will just follow law. I not say must kill foreigners but one warning shot the rioters run back to India already. So got weapon for what?

Aru: The real issue at MOE is a lot of teachers are quitting because of work overload. And it’s not teaching but admin and other non teaching work. A lot of passionate teachers have left but Ng of course still in the dark. This joker’s priority: area cleaning!

Ahmad: All they can think of is throwing money to increase salary but the real problem still not solved. (Sigh). Not everyone like PAP and affiliates so money face all the time la.

Aru: The other issue is Benjamin Lim’s suicide. The case did not require Ben to be arrested by 5 police officers in school and the school failed to protect him. Worse, after Ben’s interview at the police station, the bloody school counselor informed his parents that he was not permitted to attend Sec 3 camp.

Ah Kow: You sure 100% we can blame the government?

Aru: Common sense la. Would Ben have committed suicide if:

1 5 police officers did not show up at school to arrest him?
2 He was held without an adult for more than 4 hours by the police?
3 His school did not release him to the police?
4 His school had allowed him to attend Sec 3 camp?

Ahmad: I can say for sure he would not have killed himself.

Aru: One life has been lost but MOE (not just acting but acting blur) minister has remained silent after 1 month. Where is the leadership or maybe it’s leadershit?

Ahmad: Our system is a dam sia sway one. Got problems ministers become deaf and dumb. Everyone only know how to claim credit.

Ah Kow: Of course la, this problem not their problem. If something happen to future white horses, you think need to go to police station meh? You think the school principal dare to release ministers’ children to the police? Everything not affect them and wealthy people, they bo chap.

Aru: Now the government wants to wayang in parliament: all the questions have nothing to do with accountability. PAP is never wrong. It is the people who are wrong because they are stupid to vote for such a system. Most people can’t see they have been divided by PAP and regain their eyesight only after something bad has happened to them. A country of book smart morons have no empathy for the victims of PAP system.

Ah Kow: K, bro. Now I understand how our system kill Benjamin Lim. I promise to educate all my brothers and sisters through social media.

Aru: Thanks bro. Anything you can help in our no-justice system will not bring Ben back but at least provide some closure for his dad, mum and sister.

They are training your children to be cleaners for the future . Did the school seek permission from the parents to allow the children to do area cleaning ?

[ComplainKing]

Originally Posted by hongkongdoggy

I thought you were banned by admin for political posts and now you out from jail and repeat your offence again! 真是死性难改！

Though I may not agree with some of his posts in the past but in what way has this thread got to do with anything political ?