[pinkpanther]

singapore court got juries?

Don have lah...Kelong and bribery can happen if you have the jury system..Ah Sim might have misunderstood or overstated the situation...

[cheekopekman]

Leave the litter alone at your peril. Doing just that landed me in the soup many moons ago. On a lazy Wednesday afternoon, my student girlfriend and I were strolling on a walkway hand in hand at East Coast Park. We came upon a park bench shortly afterwards and decided to pause for rest. Two empty drink cans were lying on the middle of the bench and I shifted them aside to make way for us to sit. As I sat down I caught a glimpse of two men chatting under a tree a short distance away. They were behind us looking in our direction.

After chatting with my galfriend on my arm for almost an hour, we stood up to resume our walk by the beach. We had walked a few steps when a male voice calling over to us stopped us in our tracks. We turned around and faced two Malay men, one attired in the distinctive NPark uniform and the other wore civilian clothes. The park ranger told me in no uncertain terms that he was going to ticket me for littering by leaving the two empty cans behind. Dust bins in East Coast Park were ubiquitous.

Despite our insistence that those cans weren't ours and they were already on the bench when we arrived, he refused to budge. I handed him my IC for him to jot down my particulars. I got a ticket for littering. My parting words to him were, "I'll see you in court." "By all means" he retorted.

I knew litterers were subject to a fine. I could have just paid up the composition fine to avoid going through the rigmarole of attending court. But no, I was going to indignantly deny the accusation of littering even if I had to go on trial. In the process I hoped to expose the deplorable behaviour of the rogue public servants who falsely accused me of littering. With my girlfriend as my truthful witness, I was quietly confident that justice would prevail.

Bro, I think you had walked into their booby trap lah!  The 2 drinks cans were there as a trap for you while they hid behind the bushes lah! The moment you touched the cans, they caught you red-handed for littering lah! You jumped into Singapore River also cannot be clean lah!

[pinkpanther]

So many moons ago no news?

Long time no hear,.thought you mia 

[Lukongsimi]

Long time no hear,.thought you mia 

Not many  interesting threads to reply 
😄

[Radioshack]

At least not as bad as what this ceca did lah

https://tinyurl.com/mr292edc

[wendychan]

At least not as bad as what this ceca did lah

https://tinyurl.com/mr292edc

this one MRT  spin and say its not pee... and that passenger was unwell so they gave assistance....
elections coming. they know how to spin thinking we all stupid
and 70 % are

[luncheonmeat]

I had 2 options - 1) just pay the bloody fine and my problem would be solved. That would amount to an admission of guilt, though. I was ill-disposed to the idea as that went against my conscience. 2) reject the accusation of littering, in which case I would have to fight it out in court to prove my innocence.

As a young punk who had just came of age, I wasn't cowed by the thought of having to defend myself in a magistrate's court; in fact, I relished the prospect of my first court battle.

My girlfriend who was a student of Hwa Chong JC accompanied me to the court house on the day of mention. Standing before the judge, I entered a plea of not guilty. I was then given another date to return and face trial for the littering charge. I represented myself at the trial. I figured I didn't need to hire a lawyer to defend me over such a minor littering infraction. All I needed to do to prove I was guiltless was to speak "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."

At the trial, the NParks rangers were nowhere in sight. The public prosecutor fired the opening salvo of the trial by accusing me of bringing the 2 cans of drinks to the park and, after emptying the cans, left them on the bench and walked away. Much to his chagrin, I kept denying the allegations he made against me.

In an unusual twist, we engaged in a brief legalistic hairsplitting. The prosecutor said I initially used the word "lifted" to describe my act of moving the 2 cans to the edge of the bench. In another instance, I used another term "shifted." The two different terms I used in my testimony, he alleged, lacked consistency. Hence, the story I told about my moving the cans to the edge of the bench was just invention. As such, my truthfulness was in question, he alleged.

In reply, I said that "lifted" and "shifted" amount to the same thing, and that the precise definition of words wasn't a key component in my testimony and therefore wasn't that important.

My girlfriend then took the witness stand and swore under oath to speak the truth. She too kept denying the prosecutor's allegation that I had brought the 2 cans along. Strangely enough, the prosecutor turned his attention to her, alleging that she took out the 2 cans from her tote bag and pass one to me to drink. He also said the park rangers saw her sipping on the can of drink.

This was probably the turning point in the trial. Not only had the fickle-minded prosecution not proven its case, there wasn't a scrap of evidence in its favor. Also, there were contradictions in its evidence/testimony. My girlfriend replied angrily, "Your Honor, this man is lying. I never brought the 2 cans to the park, neither did my boyfriend. And I never took a sip of the drink as this guy alleges. The whole thing is a complete lie. I'm telling the truth in the court of justice."

Her angry outburst was met with stunned silence in the court room. Well, she'd administered the coup de grace to the prosecution's endeavor to nail me. After a quick deliberation, the jury reached a "NOT guilty" verdict.

PS: the story of our relationship is a topic for another day.

Bro, did you mean "judge"? Sinpwn abolished jury system long time liao. Oso how come the nparks orhkong peeps dint land in hot soup for giving false testimony of witnessing your gf take imaginary sips from the can. Do you remember the name of the overreaching dpp who tried to nail your guilt using stupiak word trips. Of course your gf coming from a school of '"good" repute made her testimony all the more convincing for the judge, otherwise it is just one person's words against a pak tor couple's.

[Tee tiong huat]

At least not as bad as what this ceca did lah

https://tinyurl.com/mr292edc

He is sick and throw out lehh...

[Tee tiong huat]

this one MRT  spin and say its not pee... and that passenger was unwell so they gave assistance....
elections coming. they know how to spin thinking we all stupid
and 70 % are

Yes, he is suck, real sick man...

[Tee tiong huat]

Yes, he is suck, real sick man...

It is real water throw from his mouth lehh.

[Tee tiong huat]

It is real water throw from his mouth lehh.

[Tee tiong huat]

[Tee tiong huat]

image uploading

[S I M T A N]

When the prosecutor reviews the case file, he realizes it's a trivial issue...at most, he might manage to impose a mere $300 fine if he wins the case.... However, he’s aware that there’s no honor in winning a case against a teenager who has a witness  it is a waste of public resources and time!

. He knows he lacks the solid evidence needed to make you plead guilty. The burden of proof lies with the prosecutor to demonstrate that you committed littering, but he has nothing to support his claims except for the testimony of the NEA ocifer ....

At least there is an effort on the part of the prosecutor to spin lies and twist words to create a false paradigm that could cast blame on you.... You’re fortunate that your girlfriend is brave enough to stand up for you....not many people have the courage to call the prosecutor a liar.   It could do you more harm with that remark..

 This trivial matter shouldn’t even reach the courtroom whereby a simple letter should suffice to resolve it..... Just imagine the anxiety of waiting months for a proper notice to pay the fine, followed by further delays in court proceedings. The entire situation is exhausting and adds unnecessary stress.

 Yet, you possess the guts to face it, and deep down, you know the prosecutor's case is weak due to the absence of any evidences.... It’s like asking a Muslim to prove that Jesus is a Muslim and they cannot show you strong proofs! I love having a go at them.. 

So how did you feel when you take the stand with so many eyes starring at you? How long was the ordeal? I'm sure they cut it short to save money and time.. Did your parents ask you to just pay the fines and rest the case?

Did your lady ultimately stand up for you or for someone else?

Bro, did you mean "judge"? Sinpwn abolished jury system long time liao. Oso how come the nparks orhkong peeps dint land in hot soup for giving false testimony of witnessing your gf take imaginary sips from the can. Do you remember the name of the overreaching dpp who tried to nail your guilt using stupiak word trips. Of course your gf coming from a school of '"good" repute made her testimony all the more convincing for the judge, otherwise it is just one person's words against a pak tor couple's.

Sorry, the error - 'jury' - was an oversight and a misnomer. I vaguely remember the presiding judge deliberating for a short while before returning the verdict. I guess he acquitted me because there wasn't enough evidence to convict me of the littering charge. From what I recollect, he was the lone judge handling case after case with his aides, together with other defendants and witnesses awaiting their cases to be heard in the packed courtroom.

Admittedly, my girlfriend's testimony was crucial to my case. Anyone hearing her indignant tone of voice would feel in their bones she spoke with sincerity. But something else also worked against the prosecution. Apparently, the public prosecutor's flip-flopping on key evidence was his undoing. First, he alleged that I was the one who brought the two cans of drinks, which I repeatedly denied. Making no headway, he later turned his attention to my girlfriend, my only witness, and made the absurd suggestion that she dug in her tote bag for the cans, and was seen sipping her drink. She was so mad she gave him a piece of her mind.

You don't have to be a shrewd judge to know such contradictory evidence was the handiwork of a half-past six prosecutor. Of course we can't expect a top-notch prosecutor to be detailed to prosecute litterbugs, can we? Now do you think there was a post-mortem conducted to find out what went wrong? And why on earth were the two pieces of evidence contradicting each other? Was anyone - the ranger or prosecutor - called to account for the false testimony? Well, I don't think the higher-ups will give a monkey's about this case that's too small to be important.

By d way, I wasn't in my teens at the time of the littering incident which was a few decades ago. If I were a teenager, I might have to go to a juvenile court instead. I'd come of age and was legally responsible for my actions. I didn't tell my parents about my impending court case as I didn't want them to worry too much. I felt it was a trivial matter that was nothing to worry about.

[S I M T A N]

Bro, I think you had walked into their booby trap lah!  The 2 drinks cans were there as a trap for you while they hid behind the bushes lah! The moment you touched the cans, they caught you red-handed for littering lah! You jumped into Singapore River also cannot be clean lah!

That explanation is unlikely to be true unless they were not right in the head. It beats me why they'd stoop to making such false statement about us. The two park rangers seemed to be whiling the hours away chattering underneath the tree. They were supposed to be doing their rounds at the park.

We were sitting on the park bench for nearly an hour. All the while, two pairs of eyes were watching us - a pair of lovey-dovey lovebirds necking
at times. Hmm..

[cheekopekman]

That explanation is unlikely to be true unless they were not right in the head. It beats me why they'd stoop to making such false statement about us. The two park rangers seemed to be whiling the hours away chattering underneath the tree. They were supposed to be doing their rounds at the park.

We were sitting on the park bench for nearly an hour. All the while, two pairs of eyes were watching us - a pair of lovey-dovey lovebirds necking
at times. Hmm..

Catching monkeys lah!  I used to do that as a teenager lah! Always hiding behind bushes catching couples paktor lah!

[pinkpanther]

That explanation is unlikely to be true unless they were not right in the head. It beats me why they'd stoop to making such false statement about us. The two park rangers seemed to be whiling the hours away chattering underneath the tree. They were supposed to be doing their rounds at the park.

We were sitting on the park bench for nearly an hour. All the while, two pairs of eyes were watching us - a pair of lovey-dovey lovebirds necking
at times. Hmm..

The only way to prove that they are working, even if they're not, is by issuing tickets and you happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time..   They couldn't care less if you are wrongly accused...what matters to them is the number tickets issued

[Alice Alicia]

This is a public park, not a public dustbin. Come work in Singapore and build our buildings, doesnt mean no need follow Singapore law. The authorities really need to have some sort of instruction/lessons for foreigners who come and work here.
The blanket is distinctive, next Sunday I will be looking out for them.
yes it was raining, but before that it was thundering. then drizzle. plenty of  time to clean up before running away

Well done.
My vote for you, if you stand for election.😁

[wendychan]

Well done.
My vote for you, if you stand for election.😁

not  interested to stand for elections,  but thanks  for  the vote of confidence 

in any case, i doubt PAP and my sis in law will be allowing that to happen...
plus im lousy at pretend pretend "im a good person"

but all these self styled elites are....

[wendychan]

not sunday, but same park....
the bin is jut a few steps away.....

[wendychan]

[pinkpanther]

not  interested to stand for elections,  but thanks  for  the vote of confidence 

in any case, i doubt PAP and my sis in law will be allowing that to happen...
plus im lousy at pretend pretend "im a good person"

but all these self styled elites are....

That is true...Fook Me Hard will smear you until jialat jialat before you sit on that seat..

[wendychan]

That is true...Fook Me Hard will smear you until jialat jialat before you sit on that seat..

someone will  smear will sure and i aint got the $$$ to threaten to sue....

smear me, will sure got evidence somehow.... 
others kenna smeared, ALWAYS so pure

[Ola]

The Govt must also start to fine these people who throw paper

and never clean- up the ashes with a heavy fine


[picture removed]

[wendychan]

The Govt must also start to fine these people who throw paper

and never clean- up the ashes with a heavy fine

they wont.
religion is a sensitive topic
but to me these are hypocirtes.... pray but litter after that and dont a flying FOOk

[Ola]

they wont.
religion is a sensitive topic
but to me these are hypocirtes.... pray but litter after that and dont a flying FOOk

It is dumb of them to talk about religion

They should focus and talk about Littering in public places

[S I M T A N]

The only way to prove that they are working, even if they're not, is by issuing tickets and you happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time..   They couldn't care less if you are wrongly accused...what matters to them is the number tickets issued

I believe rangers have other duties aside from nabbing litterbugs, such as looking after the park and ensuring everything is in order. I ain't sure if catching litterers was the rangers' primary assignment at that time or if each ranger was given a quota of litterers to nick, but I have my doubts.

Imagine a scenario where an awful lot of people are falsely accused of littering. There'll be one helluva of a mess, and the wronged parties won't take the falsity of these accusations lying down, like what I did.

The blaze of controversy surrounding a high number of complaints about the false accusations may compel the authorities to begin an investigation into the matter. That's the kind of egregious misconduct public servants could do without.

[S I M T A N]

Bro, I think you had walked into their booby trap lah!  The 2 drinks cans were there as a trap for you while they hid behind the bushes lah! The moment you touched the cans, they caught you red-handed for littering lah! You jumped into Singapore River also cannot be clean lah!

It never occurred to me the rangers would spring a trap on park visitors. It's even more incredible to me that they would hide among the bushes and wait for the opportunity to nab unsuspecting victims.

The two rangers were in fact standing conspicuously underneath a tree about 60 metres away from where we sat, with our backs facing them. They either failed to notice the cans on the bench prior to our arrival and saw the cans only after we left or else they had already seen those cans before we arrived and decided to make a victim of us just for the fun of it.

It's clear the rangers didn't follow the proper protocol for nicking litterbugs, and that's to catch them red-handed dropping litter before stopping them. To say the least, they were acting totally irresponsibly. I'm inclined to think that the generality of park officers are a responsible lot. Alas, one rotten apple ruined the image of the rest of them.

[S I M T A N]

Catching monkeys lah!  I used to do that as a teenager lah! Always hiding behind bushes catching couples paktor lah!

You have certainly lived up to your name! For me, I had a little problem with peeping Toms. Once, sunshades were held to my car's windscreens and side windows with suction cups to block out prying eyes. Still, a peeping Tom was undeterred as he sneaked up on my vehicle to peep through small gaps between the sunshades. Somehow or other, both our eyeballs came into contact for a split second, and he beat a hasty retreat. I then drove off in dismay with my paramour.

[pinkpanther]

That explanation is unlikely to be true unless they were not right in the head. It beats me why they'd stoop to making such false statement about us. The two park rangers seemed to be whiling the hours away chattering underneath the tree. They were supposed to be doing their rounds at the park.

We were sitting on the park bench for nearly an hour. All the while, two pairs of eyes were watching us - a pair of lovey-dovey lovebirds necking
at times. Hmm..

Have you ever stopped to consider that you might not be the only set of affectionate lovebirds around? Your close presence to them may be making them uncomfortable, which is why they feel the need to address the situation.