NUS GIRL takes her perpetrator to task

[Wind30]

Haha the main thrust of my argument is in the part you snipped off.

 

I no criminologist but I indulge you - I don't want to talk about subjects on this -cause if I pronounce judgement- then like most of you - I am no different.

 

So here In spf handling, I submit to their decision not to persecute and give chance.

 

And now - as I said your points that are crystal clear to you are debatable to me - 3 aspects -I call them - the commit, the hold and the confession.

 

Punishment as deterrent works to large extent but not as effective as you may think.

 

These crimes tend to be those that you characterise - "moments of folly" - or crimes of passion

 

Extreme example is murder - you know most countries -the punishment is lifelong imprisonment or here- death penalty- yet you still get murders - how to explain? And by your reasoning - why not upgrade most crimes many notches in punishment to deter and solve the problem?

 

Such is human nature where emotions override all reason-akin to what is happening here. Hahaah

 

Sexual crimes are like this - esp in a young hot blooded male (as you said) and when alcohol meets opportunity-all reason gets thrown out - people will still try. And will still commit.

 

Next is the hold. In crimes like that, people overridden by emotion - what kind of punishment has a hold on them? So you think expulsion has a hold on all people? So you think death penalty has a hold on an angry lover?

 

By intro disportionate sentencing - unintended consequences in this case - people who are rich can afford an expulsion- just go somewhere else and start anew. And more..

 

Which brings us to the next major point - confession.

Sexual crimes are varied - secret filming is just one. The nature of sexual crimes unfortunately difficult to prove- usually private circumstances, video may not be clear, was video corrupted, can video be doctored, it may be a touch, a brush, it may be consenting up to point girl changed her mind and her right to. How to prove?

 

When the penalty cost is so high, it will make sense to hire a lawyer to wiggle way out and find fault at every evidence. This again rewards the rich. And spf and our courts will just need to spend more public money on all these cases and lead to court delay on more important ones like rape.

 

And I can tell what will happen after this case - in fact, a lot of offenders will just lawyer up and the victims will find it harder to find closure.

 

Now my 3 points can be argued against- but what I am saying is the point you make is debatable - because there are major unintended consequences. :-)

 

Your first two points are very similar which is you say that having a bigger deterrent will not bring down the incidence of such crime significantly. 

 

The example you quoted shows a case that a crime is committed in spite of the heavy deterrent. However, you do know that it is pointless to quote an isolated case. It is all about reducing the crime rate. We have to weigh the reduction in crime (benefit gained) vs the harm (reduced chance of rehabilitation) 

 

I don't equate moments of folly with crimes of passion. I actually think the act of looking for the victim, operating the video cam, requires the offender to have a relatively clear state of mind and still have some reasoning capability. Are there really drunk people who goes around toilet looking for a specific girl and taking videos? 

 

The main point here is that there is actually ZERO deterrent coming from SPF. I am pretty sure if SPF changes their stance, such filming incidence will go down a lot. As I said, the act of filming requires a petty high level of reasoning level from the offender. If he knows that the punishment for it is huge, he will think again. Currently, the message is, let me try. Chances I will not get caught. Even if I get caught, its just a warning. 

 

Because we started from such a low base (zero deterrence) any changes should have a significant effect as the delta is huge. It is not like we were already charging the offenders and then letting them off with fines or community service and then changing it to jail sentence. SPF were like literally doing nothing and I think any step up will have a huge benefit. (law of diminishing returns)

 

The second point on the drain on public resource is a valid one. I think the way out is to prioritize which crimes we want to reduce, and to me that is all about the harm it causes to the victim. I have showed in previous posts why such filming acts can cause more harm and certain molest cases in the internet age.

 

as to point about rewarding the rich... err... so?? that happens across every crime, almost every aspect of our society. If it is a valid argument, we won't be able to do anything....

Edited April 28, 2019 by Wind30

[Aventador]

..I praise you for your bravery in bringing your wife and daughter in. Hopefully you donât have to sleep in the void deck for too Long..

Before i state an opinion, i consider the facts of the case and how i would feel if me or my family was in the same position

 

I have formed my opinion that Nic deserves a chance in this case

 

My wife was physically molested in Bangkok, so I have experienced this crime before

 

But i still hope the best for Nic

 

Of course if some new material facts appear like perhaps they found more videos on Nic home computer etc. Then i would change my opinion and be the first to call for him to be jailed

Edited April 28, 2019 by Aventador

[Victor68]

Alamak, any doctors from IMH? Till now still sticking to the gun the action is not criminal or not serious? I thought this arguement is long over but just whether those making decisions to drop proper punishment should be changed and set a correct SOP for future cases. 

[Fcw75]

..I praise you for your bravery in bringing your wife and daughter in. Hopefully you donât have to sleep in the void deck for too Long..

Noticed that when he brought his wife and daughter in, he did not say what he would do to the guy or what he hope our SPF/AGC will do in his case.

 

But since he fully sakport when SPF/AGC done for this case, I am sure he will be more than happy that SPF/AGC to give the guy a second chance and let him go.

[BenTong]

Before i state an opinion, i consider the facts of the case and how i would feel if me or my family was in the same position

 

I have formed my opinion that Nic deserves a chance in this case

 

My wife was physically molested in Bangkok, so I have experienced this crime before

 

But i still hope the best for Nic

 

Of course if some new material facts appear like perhaps they found more videos on Nic home computer etc. Then i would change my opinion and be the first to call for him to be jailed

I sympathise with your experience in Bangkok..then your experience vs your wife experience very different la. Men most of the time sure kena molested in Bangkok when go massage..

[Fcw75]

Before i state an opinion, i consider the facts of the case and how i would feel if me or my family was in the same position

 

I have formed my opinion that Nic deserves a chance in this case

 

My wife was physically molested in Bangkok, so I have experienced this crime before

 

But i still hope the best for Nic

 

Of course if some new material facts appear like perhaps they found more videos on Nic home computer etc. Then i would change my opinion and be the first to call for him to be jailed

Just answer this question.

 

If Monica is your daughter, would you still support SPF/AGC?

 

But luckily she’s not else she will have your warped thinking and just let the incident slide.

 

Btw, your wife got molested in Thailand has absolutely nothing to do with this case. This is just a red herring. Furthermore, what can you do there?

Edited April 28, 2019 by Fcw75

[yishunite]

Just put all these trolls on ignore. Its obvious they have zero interest in recognising the harm done, the frequency of these crimes, the violation of privacy and focusing only on narrow interpretation of what happened equivalent to stealing a toothbrush

 

Then these jokers expect the victim to go see mp aware minister etc before making public hoohah... while they expect the perp to be given 2nd chance, simple warning, dont be so harsh...

 

Makes u really suspect how many of the 26 posting itt

[Voodooman]

You agree but still conclude otherwise - which does not make sense but ok.

 

Reading down- your essential point is you prefer to punish more - esp like guy in this nus context - to send a stronger deterrent- this is at best a debatable point.

 

The problem is sexual assault crimes are hard to prove- and with out size penalty - many offenders will simply insist it is not them. There will be resources and time spent to prove each case and delayed closure for the victim.

 

What Nus is doing is simple - assure these kids a second chance and extract a confession and it has resolves most cases and of course made Nus complacent and dropped the ball on victim support and security and prevention training.

 

Until this case. I applaud this reveal and have no sympathy for Nus.

 

This girl is a victim but she was vindictive- and worse - keep insisting she is not being revengeful but yet explored options to take guy to court and finally naming him which she NEED NOT do to achieve her expressed goal of taking Nus to task. And likely Nus and spf has told her same thing - we considered and we wanted to give guy a second chance.

 

So she, like many bros here, do not agree with a final call from our spf and feel justified in online public shaming - this is nothing more than lawlessness.

 

If vigilante justice is so good, why not put every case out and let artificial intelligence score each post and aggregate and decide a verdict?

 

Worse here, no minister Nor Nus senior management Nor most here had the good sense to call her out on it.

 

This is most disturbing.

I won't go so far as to call Monica vindictive (i acknowledge she is also a victim) but when she made the incident public and named Nicholas, was she seeking revenge on top of her fight against what she perceived as injustice on the part of NUS and Police? Could she has done it without naming Nick?

 

Does all victims have the right to unilaterally double / triple the punishment of the perpetrators by going to social media (his life and future career is affected and perhaps ruined)? Okok.. some think he should be hanged and it would be for the better of everyone

[Voodooman]

Just put all these trolls on ignore. Its obvious they have zero interest in recognising the harm done, the frequency of these crimes, the violation of privacy and focusing only on narrow interpretation of what happened equivalent to stealing a toothbrush

 

Then these jokers expect the victim to go see mp aware minister etc before making public hoohah... while they expect the perp to be given 2nd chance, simple warning, dont be so harsh...

 

Makes u really suspect how many of the 26 posting itt

You are welcome to put me on the ignore list as well.

 

This thread is really poisonous when agreeing to disagree is now nonsense and is supported by a mod and many others. Well, if the basic principle of agreeing to disagree cannot be upheld here, guess MCF is really becoming like another HWZ.

 

This case is really grey. I can understand why some wants blood, ie to protect would be victims, but surely the issue is more complex (unless we all think our Police and AGC are really sibei incompetent all these years).

[yishunite]

Frankly it is sop that sex offenders are named. The witholding the name is tied to the overly lenient sentence in the first place - just a warning. But thats the very problem at stake, the soft touch amounting to frequent sex crimes happening in our unis

[TangoCharlie]

While the perpetrator had it worse then 26 of his predecessors, he should count his lucky stars he had not met this MMA expert.

 

Sexual offences are under reported so I applaud Monica for stepping forward. She planted a seed of change to benefit present and future undergraduates, at great personal costs.

 

前人种树后人乘凉。

 

https://www.straitstimes.com/world/americas/rio-robbers-mistake-mugging-a-female-mma-fighter?xtor=CS3-17&utm_source=STSmartphone&utm_medium=share&utm_term=2019-04-28+10%3A52%3A23

[Tonyng]

I won't go so far as to call Monica vindictive (i acknowledge she is also a victim) but when she made the incident public and named Nicholas, was she seeking revenge on top of her fight against what she perceived as injustice on the part of NUS and Police? Could she has done it without naming Nick?

 

Does all victims have the right to unilaterally double / triple the punishment of the perpetrators by going to social media (his life and future career is affected and perhaps ruined)? Okok.. some think he should be hanged and it would be for the better of everyone ð. I have no defence for that.

 

Only Monica knows why she did what she did, but I would like to give her the benefits of doubt (no element of revenge) and i would like everyone to give the same to Nicholas' remorsefulness as well but that is not possible. So we agree to disagree.

 

As a buddhist, I believe everyone deserves a second chance, even sex offenders and murderers if they can be rehabilitated.

I cannot praise you as system prevents haha.

 

So thumbs up here!

[Aventador]

Just answer this question.

 

If Monica is your daughter, would you still support SPF/AGC?

 

But luckily sheâs not else she will have your warped thinking and just let the incident slide.

 

Btw, your wife got molested in Thailand has absolutely nothing to do with this case. This is just a red herring. Furthermore, what can you do there?

Monica is not my daughter so i shall not comment what she should do

 

If my daughter was recorded in university bathroom, i would expect the case to be handled by the police

 

I am sure i would be surprised that he was given a warning. But after knowing about the facts of the case, i can see why they give the suspect a chance

 

But i would not be happy with the way NUS handled the case. I would expect a harsher penalty, perhaps even expelling him

 

I bring up my wife case because someone started with my family. I never mentioned this before

 

I mention this to say that i am qualified to comment on a outrage of modesty case because it happened to my family

 

How many of you attacking my opinion (which supports our police) had your immediate family been a victim of a sex crime?

 

And yet i never bring this up until you bring my family into it

[yishunite]

You are welcome to put me on the ignore list as well.

 

This thread is really poisonous when agreeing to disagree is now nonsense and is supported by a mod and many others. Well, if the basic principle of agreeing to disagree cannot be upheld here, guess MCF is really becoming like another HWZ.

 

This case is really grey. I can understand why some wants blood, ie to protect would be victims, but surely the issue is more complex (unless we all think our Police and AGC are really sibei incompetent all these years).

The fact that at least once in 6 weeks a sex crime is caught... and this only counts the ones that are discovered and caught, AND the victim decides to press charges instead of "giving them a 2nd chance" (now we know the system will give them 2nd or even 3rd chance with the right excuses)... this is shameful. We are a country tough on crime. We have caning for vandalism, death penalty... but when it comes to sex crimes suddenly all soft soft...

 

No one else of the perp defenders think 1 every 6 weeks (in one uni alone) is not a shocking frequency? You really wanna send your daughters to such uni?

[Tonyng]

Your first two points are very similar which is you say that having a bigger deterrent will not bring down the incidence of such crime significantly.

 

The example you quoted shows a case that a crime is committed in spite of the heavy deterrent. However, you do know that it is pointless to quote an isolated case. It is all about reducing the crime rate. We have to weigh the reduction in crime (benefit gained) vs the harm (reduced chance of rehabilitation)

 

I don't equate moments of folly with crimes of passion. I actually think the act of looking for the victim, operating the video cam, requires the offender to have a relatively clear state of mind and still have some reasoning capability. Are there really drunk people who goes around toilet looking for a specific girl and taking videos?

 

The main point here is that there is actually ZERO deterrent coming from SPF. I am pretty sure if SPF changes their stance, such filming incidence will go down a lot. As I said, the act of filming requires a petty high level of reasoning level from the offender. If he knows that the punishment for it is huge, he will think again. Currently, the message is, let me try. Chances I will not get caught. Even if I get caught, its just a warning.

 

Because we started from such a low base (zero deterrence) any changes should have a significant effect as the delta is huge. It is not like we were already charging the offenders and then letting them off with fines or community service and then changing it to jail sentence. SPF were like literally doing nothing and I think any step up will have a huge benefit. (law of diminishing returns)

 

The second point on the drain on public resource is a valid one. I think the way out is to prioritize which crimes we want to reduce, and to me that is all about the harm it causes to the victim. I have showed in previous posts why such filming acts can cause more harm and certain molest cases in the internet age.

 

as to point about rewarding the rich... err... so?? that happens across every crime, almost every aspect of our society. If it is a valid argument, we won't be able to do anything....

My point is as that your point on deterrence is debatable.

 

I note you see spf inaction here but i see due process in this current case. Laws are there but a choice of second chance was made.

 

Any change to me raises unintended consequences but like any democracy penal codes can be updated - so sure.

[Zhivago]

Part 2 imaginary story continue .... young girl was very unlucky she got filmed second time. Again she approached her father hoping justice will be served this time . But father replied , look girl as much as I sympathise with your situation I still standby my believes, although he is the second pervert ,1st time with no criminal record deserve only a warning . After much humiliation and unjust , young girl commited suicide. Who do we blame ?

[RadX]

Part 2 imaginary story continue .... young girl was very unlucky she got filmed second time. Again she approached her father hoping justice will be served this time . But father replied , look girl as much as I sympathise with your situation I still standby my believes, although he is the second pervert ,1st time with no criminal record deserve only a warning . After much humiliation and unjust , young girl commited suicide. Who do we blame ?

I definitely do not disagree that this may or may not happen

 

Then I wonder how will

Things or perceptions change?

[Jman888]

Part 2 imaginary story continue .... young girl was very unlucky she got filmed second time. Again she approached her father hoping justice will be served this time . But father replied , look girl as much as I sympathise with your situation I still standby my believes, although he is the second pervert ,1st time with no criminal record deserve only a warning . After much humiliation and unjust , young girl commited suicide. Who do we blame ?

if you were to reply your daughter this way, you are not fit to be a father and it is not the boy that kill the daughter.