Father Kang scam, wat do u guys tink?
-
hahaha....that's my view too....Originally posted by stupidissmart:Wat do u think father kang intentions is then ?? Buying Rolex watches to 2 neice serve wat purpose ? Is he trying to act like robin hood at all ? The court of law do look into the motives behind a crime before meting judgement. Tat is call mitigation. The punishment is different if u steal money because u want to support a dying mother than going to casino to spend the money.
still hidding behind the name of god...... PUI !!! -
Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.... Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience.
(Romans 13:1-5)
We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious...
(1 Timothy 1:8 )
If anyone has caused grief, he has not so much grieved me as he has grieved all of you, to some extent - not to put it too severely. The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient for him. Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm your love for him...... If you forgive anyone, I also gorgive him. And what I have forgiven-If there was anything to forgive-I have forgiven in the sight of Christ for your sake, in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his schemes.
(2 Corinthians 2:5-11)
But godliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing into the world, and we can take nothing out of it. But if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that. People who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.
(1Timothy 6 :6-10)
I take the whole situation as a lesson from God to us.
-
Maybe the raper threathen the family with death ? Maybe the raper bribes the family so much tat she cannot pursue justice ? Tat is why it is called compoundable offence isn't it ? IMO, the second objective of law is to deter or prevent offender from committing the crime again. If the raper is successfuly charged and lock up, he is prevented from raping again. It also serves as a deterent to the rest of the public on the offense of raping. The victim cannot have a say whether she want to carry on the charge or not. She can be protected like covering her face during hearing and her name be censored from the press. If she refuse to cooperate she will be sue herself with obstruction to justice. Why tis is done is to make sure justice is serve to everyone fairly.
So justice is more important the person. To some people that may seem right to me it does not.
So how do u propose to prevent a reporting or blowing up of the incident ? By covering up mah ! Wat other method r u going to use ? U also acknowledge tat the church have no powers now, HOW DO THEY PUNISH the offender ? R u sure the church can serve justice more efficiently or fairly than the legislative court ? Maybe another case of jesus will apears where he is falsely charged and punish ?
I did not say to prevent reporting. I said there is a difference between reporting and blowing it up. Punish him by stripping him of his post and make him do something, maybe work in the church for free or something. (not as a priest though)
Wat do u think father kang intentions is then ?? Buying Rolex watches to 2 neice serve wat purpose ? Is he trying to act like robin hood at all ? The court of law do look into the motives behind a crime before meting judgement. Tat is call mitigation. The punishment is different if u steal money because u want to support a dying mother than going to casino to spend the money.
I dont know what his intentions were because he never got to give his side of the story. I also said the way he handled things showed that his intention were likely not good. -
So justice is more important the person. To some people that may seem right to me it does not.
It is there to serve everyone fairly, regardless whether u r rich or poor. Tat is the bottom lineI did not say to prevent reporting. I said there is a difference between reporting and blowing it up. Punish him by stripping him of his post and make him do something, maybe work in the church for free or something. (not as a priest though)
How to allow reporting yet prevent it from blowing it up ? U still have to resort to covering up isn't it ? Punish him by stripping his post ? R u sure he will come clean on all the money he embazzled ? Maybe he has 1 million kept with his niece even when he had claimed he returned all the money. Isn't tis a potential abuse ?I dont know what his intentions were because he never got to give his side of the story. I also said the way he handled things showed that his intention were likely not good.
He sure got his chance during his defense. He didn't say anything about hidden reason or watsoever then right ? He didn't say it or he didn't have a good reason behind it ? -
It is there to serve everyone fairly, regardless whether u r rich or poor. Tat is the bottom line.
And in the process whatever happens does not really matter isnt it. I personally cannot agree with that.
How to allow reporting yet prevent it from blowing it up ? U still have to resort to covering up isn't it ? Punish him by stripping his post ? R u sure he will come clean on all the money he embazzled ? Maybe he has 1 million kept with his niece even when he had claimed he returned all the money. Isn't tis a potential abuse ?
To give an example, just look at the major US newspaper/news stations. On certain topics some just report what happen, other blow it up by adding scandals, gossips and other stuff. I gave my first example on Slim 10 before this post, the difference in reports on the one which included artist and the ones that didnt.
Force him to give up the money if not then resort to the law. I think I said it before, first let the church handle, if it cannot be handled then go to the law. I'm sure the church has means of finding if he had returned all the money or not. And even so, what is even now he has money kept in an overseas bank with other people? No one really knows. -
And in the process whatever happens does not really matter isnt it. I personally cannot agree with that.
Wat r the things tat should "happened" in "watever happen" ? Give me an example.To give an example, just look at the major US newspaper/news stations. On certain topics some just report what happen, other blow it up by adding scandals, gossips and other stuff. I gave my first example on Slim 10 before this post, the difference in reports on the one which included artist and the ones that didnt.
So u r saying the Straits Times add in UNTRUE scandals, gossips and other stuffs ? If they do u can sue or force them to publish a public apology. Can't u accept the fact tat the nature of tis news is sensational by itself ? They also publish many headlines like Iraq happenings but too bad no one is really interested to read most of them. For slim 10 incident, do they add in untrue stories in ? They just report the facts and it is the readers who find it interesting. Com'on, the press just publish news, it is the people tat interprete them. If the people want to read more of such stories, then the press will just satisfy their audience and publish out more updates. Wat is wrong with it ?
So again I have to ask, since being reported by press will inevitably blow it up, how r u going to prevent it ? By covering up lah ! U want to cover it up, so tat the priest will not get his rightly punishment nor the people get their justice isn't it ? Wat other method should u propose to do ?Force him to give up the money if not then resort to the law. I think I said it before, first let the church handle, if it cannot be handled then go to the law. I'm sure the church has means of finding if he had returned all the money or not. And even so, what is even now he has money kept in an overseas bank with other people? No one really knows.
Force him ? How ? I want to know the methods tat the church can employed to force the money out of him. Beat him up or illegal detention ? Wat means does the church have ?
For the police they certainly can check out all the bank accounts or properties he or his close one has isn't it. They can called in witness and prevent him from leaving the country. They can also have the right to question him and his close one for up to 2 days etc. They can also detain him. For certain overseas bank they also do have the power to take it out or check on it. -
Wat r the things tat should "happened" in "watever happen" ? Give me an example.
Example, the victim being charged for not testifying. That is funny to me, how the system works.
So u r saying the Straits Times add in UNTRUE scandals, gossips and other stuffs ? If they do u can sue or force them to publish a public apology. Can't u accept the fact tat the nature of tis news is sensational by itself ? They also publish many headlines like Iraq happenings but too bad no one is really interested to read most of them. For slim 10 incident, do they add in untrue stories in ? They just report the facts and it is the readers who find it interesting. Com'on, the press just publish news, it is the people tat interprete them. If the people want to read more of such stories, then the press will just satisfy their audience and publish out more updates. Wat is wrong with it ?
So again I have to ask, since being reported by press will inevitably blow it up, how r u going to prevent it ? By covering up lah ! U want to cover it up, so tat the priest will not get his rightly punishment nor the people get their justice isn't it ? Wat other method should u propose to do ?
Why do some papers put say Kobe Bryant case on the front page and barely talk about other similar cases? It is just because he is a well known basketball player. It is not fair to him or the others because the media influences everything. Because one is more important then the other. Because one sells better then the other. I dont think they added scandals in but just comparing the case with the artist and the other cases you wil noticed the difference in coverage. Months before the trial I read a story on Father Kang and sad to admit even I kinda felt he was a bad person and guilty. But he really isnt guilty until it is proven. How many others read the news without knowing the full facts and immediately thought he is guilty. Is that really fair? But if I'm not mistaken its guilty until proven innocent in singapore. And journalism is not about reporting what is popular. The better writers are the ones willing to write what is difficult or not popular. If a newspaper only publishes what people want to read then its becomes an entertainment magazine for the readers to enjoy.
You still dont get that I am trying to say that reporting an incident and blowing it up is different. Not all reports will become the "talk of the town" I belive that everyday there is at least one case in court. Some times even murder cases? and even embezzelment cases. Why is that that Father Kang's case has to be in the top news almost every day of the trial and the rest get a small little section. I understand stories like the Nicol Highway crash being in the top news section everyday but I dont understand the big Slim 10 and Father Kang cases being there. I dont want to cover it up. I worked in my school newspaper when I was in high school and I dont believe in covering up news. For things to change the flaws must be exposed. What I would prefer had happened was maybe an intro story to the cases, then a short follow up each day maybe every two days if nothing "major" happened one day and then a conclusion.
Force him ? How ? I want to know the methods tat the church can employed to force the money out of him. Beat him up or illegal detention ? Wat means does the church have ?
For the police they certainly can check out all the bank accounts or properties he or his close one has isn't it. They can called in witness and prevent him from leaving the country. They can also have the right to question him and his close one for up to 2 days etc. They can also detain him. For certain overseas bank they also do have the power to take it out or check on it.
Well, if he does not return the money and all after being confronted by the church and all means is tried then leave it to the law. I think i said that twice before already. How if he has another "goddaughter" and he has given her the money she placed it in a swiss bank account? I doubt the police can trace the money unless he or that person owns up. -
Example, the victim being charged for not testifying. That is funny to me, how the system works.
So anyone can happy happy testify someone and then withdraw it as he pleased ? Tis is to prevent people from giving false account or giving in to threats or bribes. Imagine a criminal bribing a witness not to testify at a later stage. The witness accept the money and the whole case is throw out. Shouldn't tat witness be punish for hampering justice from meting out ? Giving your own account is not a joking matter. Someone may get release when he is guilty and someone is innocent may be charged as guilty if a witness do not testify.Why do some papers put say Kobe Bryant case on the front page and barely talk about other similar cases? It is just because he is a well known basketball player. It is not fair to him or the others because the media influences everything. Because one is more important then the other.
Do u know why, because he is famous tat is why. People just want to know more things about famous people than people they do nto know. Tat is a fact of life. U don't like the way newspaper publish news but it is the fact about newspaper and journalism. I can safely say 99% of all newspaper publish news its targeted audience want to read. Since there is no way to change tat fact, wat do u suggest to prevent the blowing up of news yet allow reporting of it ? How ??Because one sells better then the other. I dont think they added scandals in but just comparing the case with the artist and the other cases you wil noticed the difference in coverage. Months before the trial I read a story on Father Kang and sad to admit even I kinda felt he was a bad person and guilty. But he really isnt guilty until it is proven. How many others read the news without knowing the full facts and immediately thought he is guilty. Is that really fair? But if I'm not mistaken its guilty until proven innocent in singapore.
The newspaper doesn't write he is guilty before he is proven one either. If the people interprete it as he is guilty, then wat to do ? Don't report on it at all ?And journalism is not about reporting what is popular. The better writers are the ones willing to write what is difficult or not popular. If a newspaper only publishes what people want to read then its becomes an entertainment magazine for the readers to enjoy.
They also do write up on issues tat r difficult or not popular. Journalism is like tis. They do not make up stories and they come up with updates on popular issues. Even CNN or BBC do these thigs. There r other issues tat became sensational such as one admin officer in SIA tat manage to embezzled many millions or the unknown husband who employs a kid to murder his wife. They too get sensational isn't it ? People r interested to know more about such cases, because they r special in their own right. Why blame the newspaper who entertain their request ?You still dont get that I am trying to say that reporting an incident and blowing it up is different. Not all reports will become the "talk of the town" I belive that everyday there is at least one case in court. Some times even murder cases? and even embezzelment cases. Why is that that Father Kang's case has to be in the top news almost every day of the trial and the rest get a small little section. I understand stories like the Nicol Highway crash being in the top news section everyday but I dont understand the big Slim 10 and Father Kang cases being there.
As a chinese saying goes "If u do not want people to be aware of tis situation, the only way is not to commit it in the first place". He commit the offence and u blame the press for blowing it up ? We r not against tis fellow but if any father, priest or religious leaders tat commit the same act it will still appear on the headline.
U r fully aware of wat the media will do. Since reporting on the incident inevitably blows it up, how do u propose to prevent it ? Again I say by covering up lah ! Wat other method do u propose ?I dont want to cover it up. I worked in my school newspaper when I was in high school and I dont believe in covering up news. For things to change the flaws must be exposed. What I would prefer had happened was maybe an intro story to the cases, then a short follow up each day maybe every two days if nothing "major" happened one day and then a conclusion.
Isn't tat wat the newspaper did
Well, if he does not return the money and all after being confronted by the church and all means is tried then leave it to the law. I think i said that twice before already. How if he has another "goddaughter" and he has given her the money she placed it in a swiss bank account? I doubt the police can trace the money unless he or that person owns up.
So u r trying to say if a normal person embezzled 5 million and he got charged and sentence to 5 years jail he deserve it while if a father embezzled 5 million and he didn't get charge since it has been covered up and he escape scot free is okie ? Just because he a father he will be treated differently from a normal person ?
Why don't u answer me tis question. Just because he is father, just because he embezzled the money from a church and tat is why he shouldn't be sue, bring to court and punish but instead the whole matter is being covered up and settled within the church ?
Lets say he return every single penny. So wat ? He don't need to serve any punishment ? He return the money because he was caught. If he wasn't he probably hold on to it forever and he has lost nothing. He deserve punishment none the less.
If he is confronted by church he can probably take a flight and escape to some other countries the next day while in a police case his passport will be taken. How r u going to say to tat ?
For your swiss bank thingy, surely the church can not do anything to it either. At least the law is better off than the church since it covers more aspects isn't it ? -
So anyone can happy happy testify someone and then withdraw it as he pleased ? Tis is to prevent people from giving false account or giving in to threats or bribes. Imagine a criminal bribing a witness not to testify at a later stage. The witness accept the money and the whole case is throw out. Shouldn't tat witness be punish for hampering justice from meting out ? Giving your own account is not a joking matter. Someone may get release when he is guilty and someone is innocent may be charged as guilty if a witness do not testify.
If a person testify that the evidence is already there. But if the person does not want to do so in the first place, is it possible that there is a reason? Maybe the threat is so real that by testifying the victim family may really die/suffer. And yes the police can offer protection but for the rest of the victim's life? I doubt the victim will accept a bribe from the person who cause them to be in their state. I still stand that the person's welfare is more important then justice.
Do u know why, because he is famous tat is why. People just want t know more things about famous people than people they do nto know. Tat is a fact of life. U don't like the way newspaper publish news but it is the fact about newspaper and journalism. I can safely say 99% of all newspaper publish news its targeted audience want to read. Since there is no way to change tat fact, wat do u suggest to prevent the blowing up of news yet allow reporting of it ? How ??
I already said how. The thing is that news is no longer called news but entertainment. News is meant to bring updates of events, inform people of things that can help or educate them. Maybe news has changed over the years to print only what people want to read but that does not mean it is right.
The newspaper doesn't write he is guilty before he is proven one either. If the people interprete it as he is guilty, then wat to do ? Don't report on it at all ?
Have you read the repotrs. Most of them says Priest take millions or priest something. And most of them read in a way that leads to his being guilty. The way things are worded makes a whole lot of difference. Report it once things are final or report it as an update not as a feature story. And yes its the people that interprete, but how can people intreprete if the news is written straight and simple.
They also do write up on issues tat r difficult or not popular. Journalism is like tis. They do not make up stories and they come up with updates on popular issues. Even CNN or BBC do these thigs. There r other issues tat became sensational such as one admin officer in SIA tat manage to embezzled many millions or the unknown husband who employs a kid to murder his wife. They too get sensational isn't it ? People r interested to know more about such cases, because they r special in their own right. Why blame the newspaper who entertain their request ?
Because it is not fair coz the media affects things whether you believe it or not. Why is it that this murdered wife gets more coverage then others, what about other murder cases? I dont think they are any less significant. They should get fair and equal coverage.
As a chinese saying goes "If u do not want people to be aware of tis situation, the only way is not to commit it in the first place". He commit the offence and u blame the press for blowing it up ? We r not against tis fellow but if any father, priest or religious leaders tat commit the same act it will still appear on the headline.
U r fully aware of wat the media will do. Since reporting on the incident inevitably blows it up, how do u propose to prevent it ? Again I say by covering up lah ! Wat other method do u propose ?
Yes, i blame the media for blowing up cases and not giving fair reports on other cases. Why is it that the person must be religious so that it will be in the headlines. So if a person is just a normal citizen he gets just small coverage. Where is the fairness in that.
So u r trying to say if a normal person embezzled 5 million and he got charged and sentence to 5 years jail he deserve it while if a father embezzled 5 million and he didn't get charge since it has been covered up and he escape scot free is okie ? Just because he a father he will be treated differently from a normal person ?
Because it is a church matter therefore the church should deal with it. I gave my example which you said was simplified but that is still the reason. I dont think he should escape scot free but different punishment should apply to different people. And anyway, settling in within church does not mean not going to jail. They can settle it in a way that he has to serve time too in prison.
Why don't u answer me tis question. Just because he is father, just because he embezzled the money from a church and tat is why he shouldn't be sue, bring to court and punish but instead the whole matter is being covered up and settled within the church ?
It shouldnt be covered up but it should be settled within the church first before going to the law.
Lets say he return every single penny. So wat ? He don't need to serve any punishment ? He return the money because he was caught. If he wasn't he probably hold on to it forever and he has lost nothing. He deserve punishment none the less.
Read above.
If he is confronted by church he can probably take a flight and escape to some other countries the next day while in a police case his passport will be taken. How r u going to say to tat ?
Then if he runs go to the police. I never said that the police should not be involved, only that they should have tried to settle it within the church first.
For your swiss bank thingy, surely the church can not do anything to it either. At least the law is better off than the church since it covers more aspects isn't it ?
That is true. The swiss bank part is just an example that the police can not be 100% sure that he has returned all the money. -
If a person testify that the evidence is already there. But if the person does not want to do so in the first place, is it possible that there is a reason? Maybe the threat is so real that by testifying the victim family may really die/suffer. And yes the police can offer protection but for the rest of the victim's life? I doubt the victim will accept a bribe from the person who cause them to be in their state. I still stand that the person's welfare is more important then justice
If tat is the case then all the trial bosses can get away scotfree. Why not possibly bribe ? I think tis is very likely if the person is very rich and tis does not affect a witness directly i.e. he is a third party witness. Maybe tis witness is just lazy and do not want attend the hearing. Doesn't tis hamper justice ?I already said how. The thing is that news is no longer called news but entertainment. News is meant to bring updates of events, inform people of things that can help or educate them. Maybe news has changed over the years to print only what people want to read but that does not mean it is right.
Aren't they updating people on the news as well They r bringing updates of events, inform people of things that can help or educate them on Father Kang case too isn't it ? Wat is your problem ?Have you read the repotrs. Most of them says Priest take millions or priest something. And most of them read in a way that leads to his being guilty. The way things are worded makes a whole lot of difference. Report it once things are final or report it as an update not as a feature story. And yes its the people that interprete, but how can people intreprete if the news is written straight and simple.
Why don't u quote a sentence from the straits times tat point to Father Kang being guilty before the hearings ? They r certain to be careful with their words tat do not point to him being guilty before. It is just your interpretation tat says he is guilty. Let me ask u how to choose which is a feature story or which should not be ? News talk about Gulf way and people may say it is pro terrorist , they can say about car accident and they say they r against the family of the victim. They can talk about the new policies on gov and people may complain tat they r pro gov. Aren't u biased ? Talking about father kang serves as a deterent to people who may potential be one too.
As said by u yourself and u feel tis is the problem of the media. It is not going to change because of father incident. So u r going to cover up right ?Because it is not fair coz the media affects things whether you believe it or not. Why is it that this murdered wife gets more coverage then others, what about other murder cases? I dont think they are any less significant. They should get fair and equal coverage.
Com'on man... everyday there r millons of car accidents in the world ? So u want them to report on EVERY CASES before they can coment on a special case ? There may be hundreds of murder cases happening around the world a day. U want them to report on every of them fairly before they can talk about the special case of murder where it happens in singapore and the husband employs the help from a 16 year old guy ? I think u r already not practical... Even if the news report in 24 hours non stop, they can't cover all the cases tat happened in the world a day. DOn't u think they should be selective to ensure the news finish within an hour or within a hundred sheets of newspaper ?Yes, i blame the media for blowing up cases and not giving fair reports on other cases. Why is it that the person must be religious so that it will be in the headlines. So if a person is just a normal citizen he gets just small coverage. Where is the fairness in that.
U think u r the one being baised. They also do a broad coverage for NORMAL people who embezzled millions from SIA or Barring bank etc. Wat do u mean by fairness ? Tis is a special case compared wth the other isn't it ? SO just because he is a religious leader then he must have lesser coverage ? All the while u r asking for special treatment just because he is a father. U r just biasedBecause it is a church matter therefore the church should deal with it. I gave my example which you said was simplified but that is still the reason. I dont think he should escape scot free but different punishment should apply to different people. And anyway, settling in within church does not mean not going to jail. They can settle it in a way that he has to serve time too in prison.
So u agree tat
if a normal person embezzled 5 million and he got charged and sentence to 5 years jail he deserve it while if a father embezzled 5 million and he didn't get charge since it has been covered up and he escape with significantly lesser sentence is okie ?
Boy r u fair. A father can have all the priviledges huh.... Any outside organisation or religion leave it to the police. So church IS SPECIAL and can play laws into their own hands. Is tat your idea of JUSTICE, FAIRNESS or EQUALITY as watthe law is out to establish ? Your solution has fail on all these 3 aspectsIt shouldnt be covered up but it should be settled within the church first before going to the law.
And wat is the church goign to do ? COVER UP LAH ! Settle ? Settle wat ?? Settle everything so tat the church name can remain lah ! Let me tell u if somehow the public know and it was found the case was coever up, then the church will have MUCH MORE explaining to do.
SIA also let law deals with it and not settle it among themselves. So does any other firms or religious group if it is found they have committed an offence. Church special lah ? FAther big... DEAL lah ?Then if he runs go to the police. I never said that the police should not be involved, only that they should have tried to settle it within the church first.
Tell me wat the church will do firstThat is true. The swiss bank part is just an example that the police can not be 100% sure that he has returned all the money.
It is also true tat u acknowledge police have more power, thus mroe ways to prevent escape than church isn't it ? -
If tat is the case then all the trial bosses can get away scotfree. Why not possibly bribe ? I think tis is very likely if the person is very rich and tis does not affect a witness directly i.e. he is a third party witness. Maybe tis witness is just lazy and do not want attend the hearing. Doesn't tis hamper justice ?
You have your "ifs" I have my "ifs". To you it may seem justice must be done regardless, but to me i still rather the victim be safe. Maybe the wtiness is lazy maybe the witness may die. Maybe its fine to take that risk. I dont know about you but I dont think that risk should be taken.
Aren't they updating people on the news as well They r bringing updates of events, inform people of things that can help or educate them on Father Kang case too isn't it ? Wat is your problem ?
That is the main aim but from what you said that they report what the people want to read, then the aim is no longer achieved. My problem is that the news is not fair and that singapore has a few major newspaper run by the same companies. Whatever these newspaper print is more or less final. You talked about CNN before. CNN is more known for being liberal, if someone wanted to read more conservative news they can watch FOX or something else. But there is no such thing in singapore. They blow news up and dont give fair coverage to all happenings. The Straits TImes and so on are newspapers not entertainment papers. If it is an entertainment magazine I dont care if they print about Father Kang day and night and print his life story or whatever.
Why don't u quote a sentence from the straits times tat point to Father Kang being guilty before the hearings ? They r certain to be careful with their words tat do not point to him being guilty before. It is just your interpretation tat says he is guilty. Let me ask u how to choose which is a feature story or which should not be ? News talk about Gulf way and people may say it is pro terrorist , they can say about car accident and they say they r against the family of the victim. They can talk about the new policies on gov and people may complain tat they r pro gov. Aren't u biased ? Talking about father kang serves as a deterent to people who may potential be one too.
Why should Father Kang be a feature while other people who commit similar crimes not be? Of course I am bias, the fact that i have my opinion points to that fact. If they give fair coverage to everything how can people say they are pro this or pro that. If the news is written straight and simply how can people intrepret it. People can only say and interprete that if there is room to do so.
As said by u yourself and u feel tis is the problem of the media. It is not going to change because of father incident. So u r going to cover up right ?
No, I am not going to cover it up. The incident and reporting has already occured. I am just giving my opinion and hoping that the media can be more fair. And how do i cover up since its already it already happen. Again, I dont think it should be covered up.
Com'on man... everyday there r millons of car accidents in the world ? So u want them to report on EVERY CASES before they can coment on a special case ? There may be hundreds of murder cases happening around the world a day. U want them to report on every of them fairly before they can talk about the special case of murder where it happens in singapore and the husband employs the help from a 16 year old guy ? I think u r already not practical... Even if the news report in 24 hours non stop, they can't cover all the cases tat happened in the world a day. DOn't u think they should be selective to ensure the news finish within an hour or within a hundred sheets of newspaper ?
Shouldnt they report a little on as many cases as they can instead of providing one large report on one "special" report. And I am not talkng about world events, only about singapore. The straits time and so on are mainly singapore news. Maybe I am not being practical but that case on the boy was printed so many times, i believe in the time the reporters took to cover that story, there could have been time to report other incidents. They should be selective to report what is more major first, but they shouldnt leave out the lesser ones.
U think u r the one being baised. They also do a broad coverage for NORMAL people who embezzled millions from SIA or Barring bank etc. Wat do u mean by fairness ? Tis is a special case compared wth the other isn't it ? SO just because he is a religious leader then he must have lesser coverage ? All the while u r asking for special treatment just because he is a father. U r just biased
I am bias i said that already. I dont think he should have lesser coverage because he is a priest, i think he should have fair amount of coverage as other cases. Maybe a little more because its more major but not to the extend that it is being reported. The reason you give for it being special is because he is religious, isnt that being religiously bias as well. So are you saying he should get more coverage because he is a preist? More coverage is also special treatment.
Boy r u fair. A father can have all the priviledges huh.... Any outside organisation or religion leave it to the police. So church IS SPECIAL and can play laws into their own hands. Is tat your idea of JUSTICE, FAIRNESS or EQUALITY as watthe law is out to establish ? Your solution has fail on all these 3 aspects
Anyone should have the right to settle the case out of court. They still have to follow the law but religion isnt just another organization. Is justice not served because he does not appear in court but gets his punishment in another way? What if he is sent to vatican city and locked in the jail there? Is justice not served? Must justice, fairness and equality be only that he gets locked up by the police, his family and friends get investigated, he goes to court and then he goes to a singapore jail? And in all my post you can take church to represent religion, any religion not just christianity.
And wat is the church goign to do ? COVER UP LAH ! Settle ? Settle wat ?? Settle everything so tat the church name can remain lah ! Let me tell u if somehow the public know and it was found the case was coever up, then the church will have MUCH MORE explaining to do.
SIA also let law deals with it and not settle it among themselves. So does any other firms or religious group if it is found they have committed an offence. Church special lah ? FAther big... DEAL lah ?
Settle it maybe they can sign a legal contract that the money be returned to the church and he can be stripped of his position and go to jail for however years. Then the news can report that the deal was made and so on. Just because it does not go to court does not mean it has to be covered up. SIA could have the right to settle it within themselves but they decided to allow the law to deal with it.
Tell me wat the church will do first
Talk to him and persuade him to return the money. And I realize my theory is flawed because religion/church has lost the power that it used to have.
It is also true tat u acknowledge police have more power, thus mroe ways to prevent escape than church isn't it ?
I do acknowledge that.
_________________________________________________ -
You have your "ifs" I have my "ifs". To you it may seem justice must be done regardless, but to me i still rather the victim be safe. Maybe the wtiness is lazy maybe the witness may die. Maybe its fine to take that risk. I dont know about you but I dont think that risk should be taken.
Then the mafia bosses and rich man son etc can never be charged. U should consider bribery as a possible abuse of the legal system instead of just the safety issue.That is the main aim but from what you said that they report what the people want to read, then the aim is no longer achieved. My problem is that the news is not fair and that singapore has a few major newspaper run by the same companies. Whatever these newspaper print is more or less final. You talked about CNN before. CNN is more known for being liberal, if someone wanted to read more conservative news they can watch FOX or something else. But there is no such thing in singapore. They blow news up and dont give fair coverage to all happenings. The Straits TImes and so on are newspapers not entertainment papers. If it is an entertainment magazine I dont care if they print about Father Kang day and night and print his life story or whatever.
Wat do u mean by not fair ? As said before they report on special cases. Why just report on special cases ? It is because it has to be selective ! There r just too many different cases tat occur in the world. News only report about singapore cases ? I am sure there r newspaper reporting on world cases such as micheal jackson cases or the case where a man volunteer to be eaten and another to eat. There r sure special cases thus should be reported isn't it ? Why father kang ? Because he is a special case since he is suppose to be a religous person and he committed a heidous crime. Wat is wrong with it ? Religiously biased ? Com'on man... if he is from the muslim association or taoist association the amount of news coverage is the same. It is not against your religion particularly but such incidents happening is little thus people want to read it.Anyone should have the right to settle the case out of court. They still have to follow the law but religion isnt just another organization. Is justice not served because he does not appear in court but gets his punishment in another way? What if he is sent to vatican city and locked in the jail there? Is justice not served? Must justice, fairness and equality be only that he gets locked up by the police, his family and friends get investigated, he goes to court and then he goes to a singapore jail? And in all my post you can take church to represent religion, any religion not just christianity.
Wrong. Nobody or any organisation can take law into their own hand and settle it within themselves. If as wat u suggested he get his punishment in another way, then does tat fulfil FAIRNESS and EQUALITY ? Another person commit the crime of embezzling 5 millions and he get 7 years jail in singapore. Father kang just because he is a father gets nothing or a punihsment of a different nature ?
BTW if the church attempt to lock up anyone, it is committing an illegal act of illegally detaining a person. Another wrong assumption u had committed in your argument is Father Kang is willing to coorperate. Wat if he refuses ? He can run away, he can escape from the church if he had a chance, he can refuse to hand in all the money and church cannot go around questioning his families. BTW the church have no power to investigate or question his families or firned or even father kang himelf. How does JUSTICE get serve ?Settle it maybe they can sign a legal contract that the money be returned to the church and he can be stripped of his position and go to jail for however years. Then the news can report that the deal was made and so on. Just because it does not go to court does not mean it has to be covered up. SIA could have the right to settle it within themselves but they decided to allow the law to deal with it.
How much money to return ? U need to investigate to know isn't it ? How is church going to investigate ? It can't do it effectively ! When pressing the sentence surely a Priest of watever rank r not as good as the people from the legal site isn't it ? And do u think the u can send anyone to jail in watever years u like ? Sorry man even is someone volunteer to go to jail it is not allowed.
If the news reports on the private deal going on, IT IS GOING TO BE MUCH WORSE WITH MANY PEOPLE AND MORE PRESS QUESTIONING THE LEGALITY OF SUCH A DEAL. The gov would be pressurized to REVOKE the deal and turn him into justice. THE PEOPLE who plan the deal will be charged or warned too and MORE FOCUS will be on the case. U must be naive tat everyone will think tis is a good way to solve the issue. As I said before it is neither fair, equal or justice to any party. -
Then the mafia bosses and rich man son etc can never be charged. U should consider bribery as a possible abuse of the legal system instead of just the safety issue.
Well, the police then has to find a way to relocate the person testifying. Mafia and gangs are very real. I am more concerned about safety then the legal system being abused. In the quest to put a few members of the mafia in jail, the victim gets to go to jail also, and his/her family members get hurt. Very very nice.
Another thing to consider is that cases can be prosecuted based on evidence. Many times what the witness says may be discredited during cross examination. So I'm sure mafia bosses and all do get charged too.
Wat do u mean by not fair ? As said before they report on special cases. Why just report on special cases ? It is because it has to be selective ! There r just too many different cases tat occur in the world. News only report about singapore cases ? I am sure there r newspaper reporting on world cases such as micheal jackson cases or the case where a man volunteer to be eaten and another to eat. There r sure special cases thus should be reported isn't it ? Why father kang ? Because he is a special case since he is suppose to be a religous person and he committed a heidous crime. Wat is wrong with it ? Religiously biased ? Com'on man... if he is from the muslim association or taoist association the amount of news coverage is the same. It is not against your religion particularly but such incidents happening is little thus people want to read it.
Why must religion be so special. How about non religious folk, if tomorrow an unknown me goes out and does something does it mean that my incident should just be masked over since I am not a religious leader. Btw, since only "special" cases are reported, who is to decide what is special? I believe the straits times have a world section and a local section. When I said religiously bias, i meant bias against religion.
Wrong. Nobody or any organisation can take law into their own hand and settle it within themselves. If as wat u suggested he get his punishment in another way, then does tat fulfil FAIRNESS and EQUALITY ? Another person commit the crime of embezzling 5 millions and he get 7 years jail in singapore. Father kang just because he is a father gets nothing or a punihsment of a different nature ?
So all people who embezzel money must be locked up in a singapore jail for 7 years? Ok since thats what i think you mean then fine. And also, i didnt say to take law into their own hands. I said they have the right to settle within themselves. Settle out of court in a legal manner of course. Court isnt the only means of doing justice.
BTW if the church attempt to lock up anyone, it is committing an illegal act of illegally detaining a person. Another wrong assumption u had committed in your argument is Father Kang is willing to coorperate. Wat if he refuses ? He can run away, he can escape from the church if he had a chance, he can refuse to hand in all the money and church cannot go around questioning his families. BTW the church have no power to investigate or question his families or firned or even father kang himelf. How does JUSTICE get serve ?
How do you know he will refuse? Usually when someone commits a heinous crime as you called it, dont they get extradited? Vatican City has its own law and everything so shouldnt Father Kang be sent there? Already said this, but if he runs and refuses to cooperate then go to the police. I said this many times before that I do not mean that the police should not be involved at all.
How much money to return ? U need to investigate to know isn't it ? How is church going to investigate ? It can't do it effectively ! When pressing the sentence surely a Priest of watever rank r not as good as the people from the legal site isn't it ? And do u think the u can send anyone to jail in watever years u like ? Sorry man even is someone volunteer to go to jail it is not allowed.
Maybe because the church has records on who donates what? And the people who donated the money will say how much they donated? I think if there is a legal contract and he signs the contract saying he is guilty and so on the state will allow him to go to jail, or vatican city jail which i believe can be arranged.
If the news reports on the private deal going on, IT IS GOING TO BE MUCH WORSE WITH MANY PEOPLE AND MORE PRESS QUESTIONING THE LEGALITY OF SUCH A DEAL. The gov would be pressurized to REVOKE the deal and turn him into justice. THE PEOPLE who plan the deal will be charged or warned too and MORE FOCUS will be on the case. U must be naive tat everyone will think tis is a good way to solve the issue. As I said before it is neither fair, equal or justice to any party.
A legal private deal is justice. It is a LEGAL deal that will not be covered up and will be reported on while the deal is being negotiated and when it is final. And just because the govt. is pressurized to do something does not the thing right or wrong. What is tommorrow i get a 2 million persons petition to release a criminal or to send someone to jail? Will the govt. do that? -
Well, the police then has to find a way to relocate the person testifying. Mafia and gangs are very real. I am more concerned about safety then the legal system being abused. In the quest to put a few members of the mafia in jail, the victim gets to go to jail also, and his/her family members get hurt. Very very nice.
U fail to acknowledge the possibility of bribery again.
Anyway wat do u suggest then ? These trial bosses will never be able to get charge ever and they can do wat they like ? U have no confidence in the legal protection in singapore ?Another thing to consider is that cases can be prosecuted based on evidence. Many times what the witness says may be discredited during cross examination. So I'm sure mafia bosses and all do get charged too.
I am pretty sure many evidence may be put down and make unimportant during the hearings too. Witnesses statement stil constitute an important fabric in justice. U want to do away with all use of witness account for hearings ?Why must religion be so special. How about non religious folk, if tomorrow an unknown me goes out and does something does it mean that my incident should just be masked over since I am not a religious leader. Btw, since only "special" cases are reported, who is to decide what is special? I believe the straits times have a world section and a local section. When I said religiously bias, i meant bias against religion.
So u r trying to fight to show tat father kang case is not special at all ? Why don't u go around and ask LOGICAL REASONABLE person, someone who has nothing to do with your religion and ask them if father kang case is interesting. I am pretty sure there r many people who feel tat way. Who to decide wat is special ? I believe the editor who had years of experience can judge better than u.So all people who embezzel money must be locked up in a singapore jail for 7 years? Ok since thats what i think you mean then fine. And also, i didnt say to take law into their own hands. I said they have the right to settle within themselves. Settle out of court in a legal manner of course. Court isnt the only means of doing justice
I think u r wrong. All people who embezzled money should be charged in court. The sentence had to depend on the judge himself.
Maybe if a Father molest a kid or woman or kill a man, they settle it out of court now. In fact there is a high possibility tat there r many cases tat were covered up as we speak now. They feel no remorse or feel no guilt in trying to cover things up, trying to settle it "within" themselves etc.
Court is not the only means of doing justice ? Maybe people should seek their own justice like revenging on people themselves. So is church a mean at all ? Please remember the church and gov is seperate now, CHURCH CANNOT TAKE LAW INTO THEIR OWN HANDS. Wat is the difference between u and the senior church ministers who take justice into their own hands and illegally detained Jesus.How do you know he will refuse? Usually when someone commits a heinous crime as you called it, dont they get extradited? Vatican City has its own law and everything so shouldnt Father Kang be sent there? Already said this, but if he runs and refuses to cooperate then go to the police. I said this many times before that I do not mean that the police should not be involved at all.
How do u know he will not ? If there is tis possibility then we cannot take tis chance isn't it ?
For your info those who r extradited is because they had committed the crime in one country but was caught in another. Surely Father Kang had committed the crime in SINGAPORE since he is cheating SINGAPOREAN MONEY in SINGAPORE, why extradit them to somewhere it doesn't concern them at all ?
If he runs, then it is too late. Call police for wat ? U think they can hunt down anyone tat is already out of singapore easily ?Maybe because the church has records on who donates what? And the people who donated the money will say how much they donated? I think if there is a legal contract and he signs the contract saying he is guilty and so on the state will allow him to go to jail, or vatican city jail which i believe can be arranged.
No legal contract can allow anyone to accept any punishment at all. Why don't u tell me wat legal contract is there tat make a person goes to jail volunteerily ? Such an absurb contract is throw off the court before they start the hearing.
He could have doctored the accounts himself isn't it ? He has no problem cheating money wat is more changing the figures in a log book or watever. He cheat for many years now, so u think all the donaters can remember wat they had donated ?A legal private deal is justice. It is a LEGAL deal that will not be covered up and will be reported on while the deal is being negotiated and when it is final. And just because the govt. is pressurized to do something does not the thing right or wrong. What is tommorrow i get a 2 million persons petition to release a criminal or to send someone to jail? Will the govt. do that?
Your private deal fails to be legal in the first place. Please read up more on law before u made such comments. It doesn't prevent blowing up the matter as when people heard the result of the final deal, they will kick up a bigger fuss as it is totally illegal and ridiculous. U never answer to tat in my previous reply isn't it ?
Your idea doesn't work, illegal, objectives is to prevent "blowing up the whole matter" which is is proven it fails, undermines the legal system in singapore, does not support FAIRNESS, EQUALITY and JUSTICE and biase toward a certain priviledge class of people. Is tat a solution at all ?
If gov get 2 million petitions to send someone to jail, do u think they shall bow to it ? Isn't tis the same as when Jesus is prosecuted and the members of the main religion pressurises the acting gov to crucified jesus even when he has no been proven of any crimes ? Com'on religious is emotional, irrational, unfair and illogical. How can they handle such important tasks like justice ? -
U fail to acknowledge the possibility of bribery again.
Actually I did. I said both ways is possible but I rather not take the risk.
Anyway wat do u suggest then ? These trial bosses will never be able to get charge ever and they can do wat they like ? U have no confidence in the legal protection in singapore ?
I did mention evidence. And how sometimes witnesses's testimoney get discredited anyway and how a case is not based on testimony.
Its not that i dont have confidence in the protection in singapore, its that I am not idealistic. The police cannot protect someone forever. Also, it is not necessary to register yourself as a member of a gang, so no one really knows who is a gang member and who will harm who. The police can only protect someone to a certain extend and i rather not take that risk.
I am pretty sure many evidence may be put down and make unimportant during the hearings too. Witnesses statement stil constitute an important fabric in justice. U want to do away with all use of witness account for hearings ?
Well, most evidence that are put down are mostly not concrete. And no I do not want to do away with the use of witness account. Just saying its not what cases are made of. If it is, then tomorrow I can go out and say something and then some innocent person can go to jail because I randomly decided to give a false account.
So u r trying to fight to show tat father kang case is not special at all ? Why don't u go around and ask LOGICAL REASONABLE person, someone who has nothing to do with your religion and ask them if father kang case is interesting. I am pretty sure there r many people who feel tat way. Who to decide wat is special ? I believe the editor who had years of experience can judge better than u.
I think the editor can judge better then me. But I think that out of 4 million people a group of people( i think the editorial board is made up of the most 20 peopple) does not make a majority. And Father Kang case is interesting and special because he belongs to a religion. That is bias against religion in general. Anyone should agree with that. So the involvement of a religion, any religion, makes a story interesting? Ok, I can accept that thats the way things are.
I think u r wrong. All people who embezzled money should be charged in court. The sentence had to depend on the judge himself.
So court is the only way of justice. Again, I accept if that is what you think.
Maybe if a Father molest a kid or woman or kill a man, they settle it out of court now. In fact there is a high possibility tat there r many cases tat were covered up as we speak now. They feel no remorse or feel no guilt in trying to cover things up, trying to settle it "within" themselves etc.
Settling out of court does not mean no punishment. So they can still feel remorse. Court should not be the only way of justice.
Court is not the only means of doing justice ? Maybe people should seek their own justice like revenging on people themselves. So is church a mean at all ? Please remember the church and gov is seperate now, CHURCH CANNOT TAKE LAW INTO THEIR OWN HANDS. Wat is the difference between u and the senior church ministers who take justice into their own hands and illegally detained Jesus.
Court and the law are differnt things. What must every case go before the judges. They are human after all, and I dont see them as being more supreme then other people. Actually, the church and goverment are not seperate. If they are, then the church has the right to their own rules. The thing is that the goverment is involved in the church, but the church is not involved in the government. Actually it was illegal because he had commited no crime. The difference I think for me, is that I think the church should only handled their people. When the priest (and monks and other religious leaders) make their entrance in their religion, isnt it like gaining new citizenship in a way. So then, the church, temples, mosque are kinda like the embassy. So whatever cases should be handled by the head. Which is vatican city for the catholic church.
How do u know he will not ? If there is tis possibility then we cannot take tis chance isn't it ?
No one knows. Its actually not really a chance. I mean the police shouldnt take a chance that tomorrow I might go out and kill my professor for failing me. Why dont they take me to jail now?
For your info those who r extradited is because they had committed the crime in one country but was caught in another. Surely Father Kang had committed the crime in SINGAPORE since he is cheating SINGAPOREAN MONEY in SINGAPORE, why extradit them to somewhere it doesn't concern them at all ?
Because they rule the church? And the father belongs to the church? And how does it not concern them? Its a church matter.
If he runs, then it is too late. Call police for wat ? U think they can hunt down anyone tat is already out of singapore easily ?
Well, dont you trust your law enforcers so much. I'm sure they can hunt him down, since they can hunt money and other things so well. Maybe they can detain all his family and friends till they give up where he is.
No legal contract can allow anyone to accept any punishment at all. Why don't u tell me wat legal contract is there tat make a person goes to jail volunteerily ? Such an absurb contract is throw off the court before they start the hearing.
Hm.. I really thought singapore, that likes to follow US and the west, will have such a thing.
He could have doctored the accounts himself isn't it ? He has no problem cheating money wat is more changing the figures in a log book or watever. He cheat for many years now, so u think all the donaters can remember wat they had donated ?
Well, you know what.. I'm sure if i donated a million or more dollars to the church or anyone for that matter I can remember. Those who write monthly checks can check that up too. And as for cash donations, I'm suer people can calculate an average. If they donate 50 a week, then times that by 55 weeks and however many years. And also, Father Kang isnt the only one keeping records of the money.
Your private deal fails to be legal in the first place. Please read up more on law before u made such comments. It doesn't prevent blowing up the matter as when people heard the result of the final deal, they will kick up a bigger fuss as it is totally illegal and ridiculous. U never answer to tat in my previous reply isn't it ?
Er.. i talked about this in my precious post. Maybe its my mistake for assuming that Singapore has followed the west so much that automatically everything is similar.
Your idea doesn't work, illegal, objectives is to prevent "blowing up the whole matter" which is is proven it fails, undermines the legal system in singapore, does not support FAIRNESS, EQUALITY and JUSTICE and biase toward a certain priviledge class of people. Is tat a solution at all ?
Its bias towards religion by blowing it up. And it is fair and equal. The whole legal deal thing is actually rather fair, at least the west which emphasizes more on human rights, has it. A person who admits to his mistake getting a lesser sentence seems fair to me. And a person who lies to the end doesnt. It seems like justice and equality to me.
If gov get 2 million petitions to send someone to jail, do u think they shall bow to it ? Isn't tis the same as when Jesus is prosecuted and the members of the main religion pressurises the acting gov to crucified jesus even when he has no been proven of any crimes ? Com'on religious is emotional, irrational, unfair and illogical. How can they handle such important tasks like justice ?
That is just what I was trying to say. Because you said the people will not be happy with the legal deal which I was talking about. And to you religion is emotional, irrationl, unfair, and illogical because you have admited that you dislike religion. So it is your opinion that they cannot handle justice. But that is not true. Only to you, and to some other people then that is true.
______________________________________________
And I dont think I am going to continue here, because your whole argument also rests on the fact that you are bias towards religion which is what this case, in my opinion, was blown up for and more. -
Actually I did. I said both ways is possible but I rather not take the risk.
I am talking about pure bribery. A rich man son commit a crime and bribe the witness not to go for hearing. Wat risk r there involved ?I did mention evidence. And how sometimes witnesses's testimoney get discredited anyway and how a case is not based on testimony.
Witness and evidence r both necessary evidence. Witness can get discredited and so does evidence. If a witness get discredited then it just means his statement is not solid enough.Its not that i dont have confidence in the protection in singapore, its that I am not idealistic. The police cannot protect someone forever. Also, it is not necessary to register yourself as a member of a gang, so no one really knows who is a gang member and who will harm who. The police can only protect someone to a certain extend and i rather not take that risk.
In tat case the police officers should not arrest trial boss as well. They may get harm by their trial members isn't it ? Maybe the judge cannot rule the triad bosses guilty as they may also get killed too. If everyone is so afraid then the triad boss can rule everything. Wat is the use of law then ?Well, most evidence that are put down are mostly not concrete. And no I do not want to do away with the use of witness account. Just saying its not what cases are made of. If it is, then tomorrow I can go out and say something and then some innocent person can go to jail because I randomly decided to give a false account.
Then most witness account tat was put down is just because it is not concrete. U can say something tat can make an innocent person go to jail. However surely they can investigate and check if u r correct. They can also question your victim as well.
Lets say someone hit and run a person and u witness the entire episode. U manage to get the car license and there r no other evidence present. Doesn't the witness account becomes important now ?I think the editor can judge better then me. But I think that out of 4 million people a group of people( i think the editorial board is made up of the most 20 peopple) does not make a majority. And Father Kang case is interesting and special because he belongs to a religion. That is bias against religion in general. Anyone should agree with that. So the involvement of a religion, any religion, makes a story interesting? Ok, I can accept that thats the way things are.
Then everyday the newspaper cannot print out anything anymore as no one can judge if it is an important news to print out or not. I ask u to go around asking other people wat is their opinion about the uniqueness of father kang case. Most will say it is interesting.
If going by your "biase" argument, then almost all news r biase. We cannot talk about Iraq as we r biase to Iraq, we cannot talk about a traffic incident as we r biase against tat traffic incident, we cannot talk about the new changes in politic as we r biase against tat politics. SO how ? No news for everyone ?So court is the only way of justice. Again, I accept if that is what you think.
R u trying to say everyone can mete out their own justice ? Everyone can take law into their own hand ?Settling out of court does not mean no punishment. So they can still feel remorse. Court should not be the only way of justice.
Remorse ? Who to gage remorse ? I can act remorse for a day and be happy about it forever. Com'on feeling etc r not accurate and cannot be use to eliminate physical punishment. Pleas be realisticCourt and the law are differnt things. What must every case go before the judges. They are human after all, and I dont see them as being more supreme then other people. Actually, the church and goverment are not seperate. If they are, then the church has the right to their own rules. The thing is that the goverment is involved in the church, but the church is not involved in the government. Actually it was illegal because he had commited no crime. The difference I think for me, is that I think the church should only handled their people. When the priest (and monks and other religious leaders) make their entrance in their religion, isnt it like gaining new citizenship in a way. So then, the church, temples, mosque are kinda like the embassy. So whatever cases should be handled by the head. Which is vatican city for the catholic church.
They r choosen to be fair and knowledgable. In a sense they r better than u or me. Church is living in society, which is the role of the Gov to protect. Not illegal ? Embezzling money is legal ? Then I will embezzle all the money I can get since I will not get punish.
Sorry man, u r living in singapore and getting into any religion will not put u into a different category to be judged. Everyone is equal regardless of race and religion. I have been questioning for the past few replies, WHY DO U SUPPORT A NOTION WHERE IT DO NOT SUPPORT FAIRNESS, EQUALITY AND JUSTICE ?No one knows. Its actually not really a chance. I mean the police shouldnt take a chance that tomorrow I might go out and kill my professor for failing me. Why dont they take me to jail now?
If u r caught for murder and u r release on bail, then wat is the probability I will escape from the country ? Very high ! Same as Father Kang, if he embezzle money, get caught and release on bail, then wat is the probability he will escape ? Very high too ! I am not talking restriction on innocent person, I am talking about restriction of travel for a person pending prosecution.Because they rule the church? And the father belongs to the church? And how does it not concern them? Its a church matter.
Why does it concern about them ? Do they get cheated of the money to him ? Is tat fair ? Just because he is from church he will be judge differently ? Is tat fair to other people ? Why don't u answer me tis question ?Well, dont you trust your law enforcers so much. I'm sure they can hunt him down, since they can hunt money and other things so well. Maybe they can detain all his family and friends till they give up where he is.
Why do u think their family members will know or betray his movement ? If they r still inside singapore the law enforcer can do much more. If they go into other countries, then wat can they do ? They can hunt down money from banks but to find anyone in India or china or any part of the world is ridiculous.Hm.. I really thought singapore, that likes to follow US and the west, will have such a thing.
The US or the West do not have such thing either. They support the notion of justice and equality as well.Well, you know what.. I'm sure if i donated a million or more dollars to the church or anyone for that matter I can remember. Those who write monthly checks can check that up too. And as for cash donations, I'm suer people can calculate an average. If they donate 50 a week, then times that by 55 weeks and however many years. And also, Father Kang isnt the only one keeping records of the money.
He can have doctor the accounts or the record of the money. How about some members who had died, moved or untracable ? Can u remember them ? Wat u have calculated is just an approximate. The true figure may varies greatly.Er.. i talked about this in my precious post. Maybe its my mistake for assuming that Singapore has followed the west so much that automatically everything is similar.
The West do not have such contract either.Its bias towards religion by blowing it up. And it is fair and equal. The whole legal deal thing is actually rather fair, at least the west which emphasizes more on human rights, has it. A person who admits to his mistake getting a lesser sentence seems fair to me. And a person who lies to the end doesnt. It seems like justice and equality to me.
as said it is not biase as they can do it towards any religion. Why is it fair and equal ? U have not explain yourself well at all ! Even if the West emphasizes human rights they still respect equality. If anyone admits to their mistake, they get a lesser sentence in court under mitigation. Where do u get justice and equality ? Do u know wat is fairness, equality or justice ?
Someone who had commit the same offence get to be judged in court while someone from church don't ? Is tat EQUALITY ? If the church person get a lesser punishment compare to someone not from it, is tat FAIRNESS ? They can easily escape or not get a punishment tat is nto befitting, is tat JUSTICE ? Is tat a solution ??That is just what I was trying to say. Because you said the people will not be happy with the legal deal which I was talking about. And to you religion is emotional, irrationl, unfair, and illogical because you have admited that you dislike religion. So it is your opinion that they cannot handle justice. But that is not true. Only to you, and to some other people then that is true.
Why don't u go around and ask other people wat do they think about tis illegal deal ? U have not stated clearly how do the church do justice at all, tat is why I said they cannot handle justice. I tell u the church cannot mete out justice is true to almost everyone except people who r fanatics in your religion. -
I am talking about pure bribery. A rich man son commit a crime and bribe the witness not to go for hearing. Wat risk r there involved ?
The risk is not knowing whether there is a threat or not. Just forcing people to testify is not the best thing to do.
Witness and evidence r both necessary evidence. Witness can get discredited and so does evidence. If a witness get discredited then it just means his statement is not solid enough.
No, evidence is necessary, but witness is not. If you need simple examples, I will provide them.
In tat case the police officers should not arrest trial boss as well. They may get harm by their trial members isn't it ? Maybe the judge cannot rule the triad bosses guilty as they may also get killed too. If everyone is so afraid then the triad boss can rule everything. Wat is the use of law then ?
POlice can protect themselves. And the judges are protected too. Most of them live in houses with gates and all. The law is to do justice which is to better the lives of people. But you know, many judges get killed too. And they get threats almost everyday. So yes, they are protected.
Then most witness account tat was put down is just because it is not concrete. U can say something tat can make an innocent person go to jail. However surely they can investigate and check if u r correct. They can also question your victim as well.
Lets say someone hit and run a person and u witness the entire episode. U manage to get the car license and there r no other evidence present. Doesn't the witness account becomes important now ? [/b[
Witness account is important but there will always be evidence, car paints getting on the victim who was hit. Car having a dent, or records that the owner changed his/her car parts. Nothing can be hidden or disappear into thin air. Crimes are included.
[b]Then everyday the newspaper cannot print out anything anymore as no one can judge if it is an important news to print out or not. I ask u to go around asking other people wat is their opinion about the uniqueness of father kang case. Most will say it is interesting.
No, everyday news are pretty fair. None are blown up.
If going by your "biase" argument, then almost all news r biase. We cannot talk about Iraq as we r biase to Iraq, we cannot talk about a traffic incident as we r biase against tat traffic incident, we cannot talk about the new changes in politic as we r biase against tat politics. SO how ? No news for everyone ?
You are wayy exaggerating. The fact is you agree that this piece of news is "interesting" because of the involvement of religion.
R u trying to say everyone can mete out their own justice ? Everyone can take law into their own hand ?
I am saying that court and law is differnt. If a person confesses to his/her crime does he/she still need to go to court? No, but the law is still done isnt it.
Remorse ? Who to gage remorse ? I can act remorse for a day and be happy about it forever. Com'on feeling etc r not accurate and cannot be use to eliminate physical punishment. Pleas be realistic
Hm.. emotional/mental punishment is much worse then physical. And anywayz, you were saying that if it was settled the the private legal deal that i assumed sg had, he wouldnt feel remorse and i was replying that he can still feel remorse.
They r choosen to be fair and knowledgable. In a sense they r better than u or me. Church is living in society, which is the role of the Gov to protect. Not illegal ? Embezzling money is legal ? Then I will embezzle all the money I can get since I will not get punish.
They are smarter, more experience but not a better person. They are normal human beings who make mistakes. Embezzling is illegal. I was saying the detention of Jesus was wrong because he(jesus) had not done anything illegal. Remember you were talking about Jesus??.. I'm sorry I cannot quote from the beginning of our discussion, but I will try to clear up things like this whenever possible.
Sorry man, u r living in singapore and getting into any religion will not put u into a different category to be judged. Everyone is equal regardless of race and religion. I have been questioning for the past few replies, WHY DO U SUPPORT A NOTION WHERE IT DO NOT SUPPORT FAIRNESS, EQUALITY AND JUSTICE ?
Actually everyone is equal in singapore till something like this comes along. Then religion is thrown into the limelight for doing something bad, and then the general public who does not really know what faith is about has a bad impression of faith. But I dont blame others for this, coz everyone does it. They take the bad of something and overwrite the good so the whole thing looks bad.
If u r caught for murder and u r release on bail, then wat is the probability I will escape from the country ? Very high ! Same as Father Kang, if he embezzle money, get caught and release on bail, then wat is the probability he will escape ? Very high too ! I am not talking restriction on innocent person, I am talking about restriction of travel for a person pending prosecution.
Actually, we are talking about him not getting caught or released on bail. Just the church discovering his acts and asking him about it. I dont think people are stupid, if his starts buying air tickets or something then go to the police or something. Dont just stand there and watch him enter the plane or boat and run away.
Why does it concern about them ? Do they get cheated of the money to him ? Is tat fair ? Just because he is from church he will be judge differently ? Is tat fair to other people ? Why don't u answer me tis question ?
I have answered you many times. I think it is fair that he is handled by vatican city. The church belongs to them. I dont know if you heard about the molestation by priest in the US, vatican city handled some of those too. If tomorrow, I go to malaysia and do something illegal, it does concern singapore because I am a singaporean right. Maybe not. Maybe they dont care because it didnt happen on singapore soil. I dont know specific Singapore rules about such things.
Why do u think their family members will know or betray his movement ? If they r still inside singapore the law enforcer can do much more. If they go into other countries, then wat can they do ? They can hunt down money from banks but to find anyone in India or china or any part of the world is ridiculous.
Not really, like I said something/someone cannot just dissappear into thin air. They can trace where he fly to, then who he come into contact with, what place he took, then what taxi he took. The police is much more resourceful then just sitting at tables and calling up for bank infomation.
The US or the West do not have such thing either. They support the notion of justice and equality as well.
The US does. Please check that. They certainly have such a thing as a legal private deal out of court but allowed by the court. And yes, they support equality much more then other countries does.
He can have doctor the accounts or the record of the money. How about some members who had died, moved or untracable ? Can u remember them ? Wat u have calculated is just an approximate. The true figure may varies greatly.
Can he doctor every single accout? The police also cannot be 100% sure how much money he has taken, the church cannot be 100% sure, but they can do it to the closest they can. I doubt you go to church and donate money. The records are pretty good and all you know. Religion isnt as dumb as you think it is.
The West do not have such contract either.
They certainly do. I have read about it when I was in the US.
as said it is not biase as they can do it towards any religion. Why is it fair and equal ? U have not explain yourself well at all ! Even if the West emphasizes human rights they still respect equality. If anyone admits to their mistake, they get a lesser sentence in court under mitigation. Where do u get justice and equality ? Do u know wat is fairness, equality or justice ?
It is bias against religion in general. It is justice because a person who repents gets a lesser sentence. It is justice. I dont know your version of fairness, equality or justice as you keep stating. But it seems very fair to people. Someone makes a mistakes, admits to it and gets punished but less then a person who still refuses to admit to the end.
Someone who had commit the same offence get to be judged in court while someone from church don't ? Is tat EQUALITY ? If the church person get a lesser punishment compare to someone not from it, is tat FAIRNESS ? They can easily escape or not get a punishment tat is nto befitting, is tat JUSTICE ? Is tat a solution ??
Come on, I said it before. Why singaproe court? Why is singapore court superior to the other justice systems in the world? He will get lesser punishment because he admits to his crime and not because he belongs to the church. What punishment do you see as the more benifiting? Must all be caned? What? Escape? Escape wat? How is going to jail in vatican city a form of escape?
Why don't u go around and ask other people wat do they think about tis illegal deal ? U have not stated clearly how do the church do justice at all, tat is why I said they cannot handle justice. I tell u the church cannot mete out justice is true to almost everyone except people who r fanatics in your religion.
Well, I will say the people I asked actually agrees with it. I have stated very clearly yet you refuse to accept my pov while I have accepted yours. Not saying you have to agree with it though. The last statement is so extremely bias, but I know you are bias against religion in general so I should expect that from you. IYO the church cannot do justice because your idea of justice differs so much from what justice actually is. And your statement has no backing at all, coz you have not surveyed even a 1000 people have you? So yeah. This is the end. I made my mistake in about 2 assumptions. But the end results in debating with you will be religion vs. hate religion.
By the way, i cannot be considered a fanatics. Religious people consider me an outcast and i guess I can take you to represent all non-religious people and i also seem like an idiot and irrational person. So both ways, I am just an outcast therefore my eccentricity may not be suited for anyone outside people of similar percuilar traits. i.e plaine weird outcast. haha.. -
The risk is not knowing whether there is a threat or not. Just forcing people to testify is not the best thing to do.
U fail to acknowledge the case where it is just pure bribery. There is no threat and the witness r bribed into not giving their statement.
How do u prevent tat ?No, evidence is necessary, but witness is not. If you need simple examples, I will provide them.
Both evidence and witness r necessary. If u insist tat witness is not important at all for judgement then u really know nuts about law.POlice can protect themselves. And the judges are protected too. Most of them live in houses with gates and all. The law is to do justice which is to better the lives of people. But you know, many judges get killed too. And they get threats almost everyday. So yes, they are protected.
Wat is the diff between normal policeman, judges and witness ? All r human isn't it ? If a group of people r determined to kill one individual, the difficulty is relatively the same. Do policemen live in houses with gates ? Is there a law saying tat judges should have a house with tall gates ?
Your version of "better" is to make a few individual happy at the expense of the rest. HAve u better the lives of all the people ?No, everyday news are pretty fair. None are blown up.
Then why do u discredit the judgement of the editors and talk about editors make up only of a minority thus unable to make judgement ?You are wayy exaggerating. The fact is you agree that this piece of news is "interesting" because of the involvement of religion.
U r wayy exaggerating yourself. U do agree to the fact tat this piece of news is interesting and u do agree tat if other religion commit the same offence the media will report to the same extent as yours. Wat is your case against the press ?I am saying that court and law is differnt. If a person confesses to his/her crime does he/she still need to go to court? No, but the law is still done isnt it.
Why not ? He still need to receive judgement isn't it ? Wat do u mean by No ?? He has commit a crime, the harm has already been done so he need to receive sentence. Tis is not christainity which "Just ask to be forgiven and it will be done". I can killed hundreds men and then confess to police after tat. Just because I confess does tat means I am a free man ? NO !Hm.. emotional/mental punishment is much worse then physical. And anywayz, you were saying that if it was settled the the private legal deal that i assumed sg had, he wouldnt feel remorse and i was replying that he can still feel remorse.
How can u assume he will feel remorse forever about it ? U r trying to say instead of giving him physical punishment like jailing, they should NOT have given him any sentence and let him feel remorseful. Tis tactics is dumb and cannot work. Letting him live with Remorse is not a punishment at all.They are smarter, more experience but not a better person. They are normal human beings who make mistakes. Embezzling is illegal. I was saying the detention of Jesus was wrong because he(jesus) had not done anything illegal. Remember you were talking about Jesus??.. I'm sorry I cannot quote from the beginning of our discussion, but I will try to clear up things like this whenever possible
They r more qualified than u or me, thus better at making judgement. Everyone made mistakes, does the church priest not make them too ? Going by your case, doesn't tat make nobody in the world capable of giving judgement, and all criminals can walk freely ?Actually everyone is equal in singapore till something like this comes along. Then religion is thrown into the limelight for doing something bad, and then the general public who does not really know what faith is about has a bad impression of faith. But I dont blame others for this, coz everyone does it. They take the bad of something and overwrite the good so the whole thing looks bad.
Tat is human nature. If u want to blame, blame the maker.Actually, we are talking about him not getting caught or released on bail. Just the church discovering his acts and asking him about it. I dont think people are stupid, if his starts buying air tickets or something then go to the police or something. Dont just stand there and watch him enter the plane or boat and run away.
No I am talking about him already getting caught and release on bail. U say tat the church make their own investigation isn't it ? Doesn't tat surely alert him he was being investigated ? He can run away when he realise tat isn't it ? Isn't tat the same as "getting caught and release on bail" ?
How do u know he is buying the ticket for air travel or boat travel ? U send someone to follow him around 24 hours a day, thus committing harassment to tat fellow ? For the police they can confiscate his passport or place his name into wanted list who cannot exit the country. Can the church do tat ?I have answered you many times. I think it is fair that he is handled by vatican city. The church belongs to them. I dont know if you heard about the molestation by priest in the US, vatican city handled some of those too. If tomorrow, I go to malaysia and do something illegal, it does concern singapore because I am a singaporean right. Maybe not. Maybe they dont care because it didnt happen on singapore soil. I dont know specific Singapore rules about such things.
It is not fair as he is handled differently from other people. In case u do not know, those who handle the molestation case in US has to do double and have to go for civilian trials too. Only when the victim decided to compound the offence, tat is stop charging the priest then does he have to face trials in Vatican. Please take not e of the word, compoundable.
For your example of law, u r dead wrong. No matter which country u r from, if u commit a crime in other country u face their sentence. Remember Mcheal Faye ? He is American yet have to face singapore trial if he commit crime in singapore. U really don't know anything about law do u ?Not really, like I said something/someone cannot just dissappear into thin air. They can trace where he fly to, then who he come into contact with, what place he took, then what taxi he took. The police is much more resourceful then just sitting at tables and calling up for bank infomation.
U have greatly overestimate police capability. They can trace to where he fly to but how to trace which taxi, which place he went to ? Do u give your personal particulars when u board a taxi, MRT or bus ? How does police know where he went to ?The US does. Please check that. They certainly have such a thing as a legal private deal out of court but allowed by the court. And yes, they support equality much more then other countries does.
Tat is called "compoundable" offence which singapore have too. Very little offence is compoundable by nature. Molest though is compoundable whilc embezzling of money is not. If u talk about private deals u probably talk about molestation case. Father Kang case is not a molest case but a breach of public trust. Please read up basic law...Can he doctor every single accout? The police also cannot be 100% sure how much money he has taken, the church cannot be 100% sure, but they can do it to the closest they can. I doubt you go to church and donate money. The records are pretty good and all you know. Religion isnt as dumb as you think it is.
The police certainly can know more closer than the church since they can find out the amount he has stash in banks. Can u tell me the church can approximate better than the police ? If not then I think u do not have an argument about it.They certainly do. I have read about it when I was in the US
Please read more. U probably touch on molest or compoundable cases only.It is bias against religion in general. It is justice because a person who repents gets a lesser sentence. It is justice. I dont know your version of fairness, equality or justice as you keep stating. But it seems very fair to people. Someone makes a mistakes, admits to it and gets punished but less then a person who still refuses to admit to the end.
I have stated many times in the court here they do look at people who admits to mistake and lower their sentence. THEY DO. Tat can be an area for mitigation ! I have been trying to tell u tat for many replies yet u do not realise it. The sentence is only lowered, NOT ELIMINATED. If it is ELIMINATED then I will go around, committing crimes and then confess to it later. Does tat means I do not have to face any sentence at all ?Come on, I said it before. Why singaproe court? Why is singapore court superior to the other justice systems in the world? He will get lesser punishment because he admits to his crime and not because he belongs to the church. What punishment do you see as the more benifiting? Must all be caned? What? Escape? Escape wat? How is going to jail in vatican city a form of escape?
I am not comparing singapore court with the world, I am comparing the court system to church system. U r trying to say The church can mete out justice better than the court here ? Tat is ridiculous !
Please read the above passage again.Well, I will say the people I asked actually agrees with it. I have stated very clearly yet you refuse to accept my pov while I have accepted yours. Not saying you have to agree with it though. The last statement is so extremely bias, but I know you are bias against religion in general so I should expect that from you. IYO the church cannot do justice because your idea of justice differs so much from what justice actually is. And your statement has no backing at all, coz you have not surveyed even a 1000 people have you? So yeah. This is the end. I made my mistake in about 2 assumptions. But the end results in debating with you will be religion vs. hate religion.
U ask who ? Member of your church ? They support your notion church can give trials, perform investigation and sentence people ? The end result is religion system vs legal system in performing justice, which I clearly see u r not being rational or provide any justification about it. Tis is not "religion vs hate religion"By the way, i cannot be considered a fanatics. Religious people consider me an outcast and i guess I can take you to represent all non-religious people and i also seem like an idiot and irrational person. So both ways, I am just an outcast therefore my eccentricity may not be suited for anyone outside people of similar percuilar traits. i.e plaine weird outcast. haha..
If I am u, I should probably should ponder why am i an outcast. -
Ok, today ST very touching.
Father Kang wanted to unfreeze his asset to return them to the Catholic Church.