Jump to content

High Court acquits maid of stealing S$34,000 worth of items from CAG chairman Liew Mun Leong’s home


Ysc3
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Picnic06-Biante15 said:

Appeal Court is the last stand and no more appeal against the Appeal Court decsions. :we-all-gonna-die:

The only last & final one is appeal to the President. :want:

Example, look at those drug cases who had been sentence to death that made a final appeal to the Appeal Court. Appeal Court rejects, next & last resort is the President. 

He dare to bring up to Appeal Court or the President?

Lai lah. See if he dare. 

 

↡ Advertisement
  • Praise 1
  • Haha! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Weez911 said:

I hope the FoodPanda folks be careful with the doorbells at Chancery Lane. Don't press too many times, if not can kena jail... 

image.png.073ce1896355cba6915d42ca139f45e7.pngDon't ring the door bell. Bring your own!🤣

  • Praise 1
  • Haha! 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Sdf4786k said:

ok, here lies the question .

If a company order the equipment to be destroyed and send to the junk yard. Along the way, a smart entrepreneur finds that its such a waste and resuscitate and refurbish the goods for use. 

Along come another party that sees value in the item and buys it from the person who refurb it.

Is it still a crime of stealing?

I am not referring to money that is to be burn in order for the same denomination to be circulated. Just to be safe on the context of the question.

Your assumed case is different. You added a lot more conditions. Specifically it has to be 1. destroyed and 2. sent to the junk yard. That process might take half a day or one day man hour and the company budgeted the hours to do it. If such junk yard exists and appointed, the yard should also produce a record for the employee to bring back. 

Before that the company must have certified /approved the asset to be written off, assigned people to do it. The whole thing has gone through and processed.

So your case is totally different

 

 

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Yewheng said:

He is CEO, so his circle of friends most likely also those big shot. So it's good that AG Lucien Wong to recused himself. Like that will have more fair judgement.. 

More interesting circle is...

LML maid complain of working many places.

MOM look into complain.

MOM'shusband works for LML.

Problem of small circles.

 

  • Praise 1
  • Haha! 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Karoon said:

More interesting circle is...

LML maid complain of working many places.

MOM look into complain.

MOM'shusband works for LML.

Problem of small circles.

 

Josephine's husband work for LML?

I am sure there won't be any conflict of interest. I have belief in josephine. I trust her to be professional as a minister of mom.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, minion said:

Your assumed case is different. You added a lot more conditions. Specifically it has to be 1. destroyed and 2. sent to the junk yard. That process might take half a day or one day man hour and the company budgeted the hours to do it. If such junk yard exists and appointed, the yard should also produce a record for the employee to bring back. 

Before that the company must have certified /approved the asset to be written off, assigned people to do it. The whole thing has gone through and processed.

So your case is totally different

 

 

Some of the bigger companies have a system reliability engineer that does everything in house and poverise the parts till you can’t tell if it’s even a hard disk. Some banks however have some back door policy where some times things are not done the way it supposed to be due to laziness or cliam ignorance 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very interesting to read Temasek jumping into this. I wonder who instructed the officer to make such a comment and did they think through even before making that statement? Many billionaires have invested billion into Singapore and help grow our economy. Should they now be patrons of our country and have immunity? 

  • Praise 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kopites said:

Josephine's husband work for LML?

I am sure there won't be any conflict of interest. I have belief in josephine. I trust her to be professional as a minister of mom.

 

under Surbana. One is chairman, one is ceo.

↡ Advertisement
  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...