This Beast Worse Than Any Other Beast

[SuPerBoRed]

I don't think multiple spinal fractures is not intentional.

 

In that case slavery and flogging a slave to death is also not intentional mah. But your honour, i wanted him to work. I can flog him to near death and expect him to work tomorrow.

 

intention to cause hurt... and intention is kill is different la ...  

[Chongster]

Don’t need to intend the death under this limb (iii)

Of section 300. Even if not murder, should also be culpable homocide not amounting to murder under s299.

 

(iii)cause the death with the intention of causing bodily injury, and that bodily injury is objectively determined to be sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.

 

Once upon a time, many cases of people killed while fighting etc will get charged under this limb. But that was when judges like Choor Singh was around

[Lala81]

intention to cause hurt... and intention is kill is different la ...

What If I'm a psychopath that genuinely believes that stabbing someone twenty times will only cause a teeny weeny bit of hurt ;)

[Chongster]

If culpable homicde not amounting to murder, max is life imprisonment.

 

If grievous hurt, max only 10 yrs

[SuPerBoRed]

What If I'm a psychopath that genuinely believes that stabbing someone twenty times will only cause a teeny weeny bit of hurt ;)

 

then that said person wld be going to mental hospital lor.... 

[Kopites]

Like i said there is no rash act here. It's deliberate acts over long periods.

Anyway the law is the law. I also é¨å¤æ±ãdunno what I'm talking also.

Yes like the law deal with them as we all are men outside the door. Hahaha

 

 

My point is shouldn't neighbour be alert with all the beating going on? No one pay heed?

[Othello]

I somewhat agree with Lala.... These 2 scums just escaped because of the law .

 

Yes, of course murder was never in their mind.

 

But put it this way, if I beat a dog everyday, and give a slice of bread everyday nia ..... sooner or later the dog will die right ? With daily beatings and deprivation of food ($30 per week for transport and food, go figure). Surely any living thing will die. So by persisting in this course of action, there will only be one certain ending. 

Edited November 28, 2017 by Othello

[SuPerBoRed]

If culpable homicde not amounting to murder, max is life imprisonment.

 

If grievous hurt, max only 10 yrs

 

but they pleaded guilty....  

 

so.. max 5...  

 

tho.. if sustained public anger at said sentence... (recall that angmo with underage girl)... AG may push to review... but unlikely to adjust.. since deal was clearly struck for the plea bargain...  

I somewhat agree with Lala.... These 2 scums just escaped because of the law .

 

Yes, of course murder was never in their mind.

 

But put it this way, if I beat a dog everyday, and give a slice of bread everyday nia ..... sooner or later the dog will die right ? With daily beatings and deprivation of food ($30 per week for transport and food, go figure). Surely any living thing will die. So by persisting this course of action, there will only be one certain ending. 

 

waitress at a restaurant bro... i doubt she was deprived of food.... 

 

but yea.. scums escaped becoz of the definition of murder.... 

Edited November 28, 2017 by SuPerBoRed

[DACH]

https://singaporelegaladvice.com/law-articles/the-difference-between-murder-and-culpable-homicide-in-singapore/

 

 

Sections 299 and 300 of the Penal Code govern the offences of culpable homicide and murder respectively.

 

Section 300 states that you commit murder, if you:

 

- cause the death with the intention of causing the death.

- cause the death with the intention of causing bodily injury that you know is likely to kill the person

- cause the death with the intention of causing bodily injury, and that bodily injury is objectively determined to be sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.

- cause the death knowing that what you are doing is so imminently dangerous that it must in all probability cause death.

If any of the above limbs are fulfilled, then murder has been committed, except where one of the special defences also apply:

 

- when there was provocation

- when offender had the right of private defence, but exceeded it

- when offender was exceeding the power of a public servant in good faith

- when the act was committed as a result of a sudden fight

- when the victim is above 18 and had consented to being killed

- when it is a case of a mother killing a child of less than 12 months old

- when there is a case for diminished responsibility (because of the accused’s mental faculties were substantially impaired)

If the situation falls into one of the categories mentioned above, the offender would not be guilty of murder but would be guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder instead.

 

While the death penalty used to be mandatory for accused persons found guilty of murder, it is now discretionary except for the first limb of section 300 of the Penal Code with effect from 1 January 2013. In other words, as long as you had not caused the death of the victim with the exact intention of doing so (as is usually the case for murders in cold blood), and are found guilty for murder on a different limb (e.g. intending to cause a bodily injury which was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death), the court can either still sentence you to death, or choose to sentence you to life imprisonment and caning instead.

 

On the other hand, if you are not found guilty of murder, you may be found guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder instead. The culpable homicide provisions are worded very similarly to those governing murder, seeing as how murder is a subset of culpable homicide.

 

If found guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder, the punishment differs depending on the mental state of the accused at the time of the killing (e.g. whether you had intended to cause death, or whether you had carried out the act of killing with the knowledge that such act is likely to cause death, though not actually intending for death to happen). See section 304 of the Penal Code for more information.

 

As a side note, it has to be noted that unlike the law in United States, Singapore does not classify murder in terms of degrees (e.g. first or second degree murder). It also does not have the offence of manslaughter, either voluntary or involuntary. These classifications in the United States are somewhat similar to how the Singapore Penal Code contains four limbs of murder within the same provision, where these provide for the states of mind which the accused could possibly have been under while committing the act of killing.

[Atonchia]

I think murder is applicable for a specific plan with intention to kill. One of the cases I remember is a guy instruct a boy to kill the ex wife. Beating and torture is kinda grey as it can be justify with no intention to kill.

The boy now is 31 yrs

Can seek presidential pardon now.

Will be annual review if pardon is rejected.

 

Just reported last week.

I dunno whats the max lock up for these charges of causing grievous hurt. But it better be a for a bloody long time until they only need wheelchairs to go past Changi prison gate.

 

You can't beat a person until she's lying in her own urine and think it's going to be OK... I probably won't kill doing this.

Better be longer term than the one who embezzled millions from APB and their bankers.

 

Or else is like lost millions have heavier sentence than causing a death.

[Bacteria83]

Tortured to death is lot more cruel then direct instant murder. The punishment should be more severe imo.

[Pocy]

No legal person here?

I think it depends on whether the AG has sufficient evidence to press a murder charge and also the defending counsel's negotiation with AG. I feel the rope not enough to let the 2 mother f**kers feel the pain and suffering of the victim. Better let them stay 10 years, add rotan (for the man) and the heroes inside to serve them the same way daily.

[kdash]

No legal person here?

I think it depends on whether the AG has sufficient evidence to press a murder charge and also the defending counsel's negotiation with AG. I feel the rope not enough to let the 2 mother f**kers feel the pain and suffering of the victim. Better let them stay 10 years, add rotan (for the man) and the heroes inside to serve them the same way daily. ð¡

i think unfortunately nothing in the law can let these 2 feel the pain and suffering which the victim went through... death sentence is too cheap...

[Jman888]

this type of man only know how to find excuse 

 

The chinese name of the law firm is quite interesting   

【兀兰命案】“姐夫”求轻判： 我只是“帮凶” 怕老婆才帮打

2017年11月28日 星期二 03:04 PM

文/周海丽 来自/联合晚报

 

恐怖“姐姐”陈慧珍（右）和“姐夫”潘和全曾虐打死者长达八个月。（档案照）

 

“我怕老婆，也不赞同她虐打死者，但不敢管制和反抗她，如果我不代劳（打她），她会继续不断打她。”

 

昨天（11月27日）承认与老婆陈慧珍（33岁，家庭主妇）联手虐打低智商“妹妹”房客余玉莲（26岁，服务生）致死后，男被告潘和全（38岁，货仓管理）在求情时，称因怕老婆不敢阻止只好自己出手代劳阻止她，声称自己只是帮凶，求情请法官判监不超过10年和不超过12下鞭刑。

 

《联合晚报》昨天报道，兀兰9道第878座组屋三楼在2015年4月13日发生命案，余玉莲被发现死在租来的睡房内，被她亲切称为“姐夫”和“姐姐”的房东夫妇潘和泉和陈慧珍昨天（11月27日）认罪。

 

 

赢必胜法律事务所（Invictus Law)的义务代表律师陈俊良和黄国彦昨天下午替他们求情时说，男被告怕老婆，对老婆唯命是从。当老婆打女死者打到累了叫他接着打，他不敢不服从；当他停手而老婆叫他接着打，他不敢不听；当老婆发现他打得不够大力时叫他用力一点时，他也不敢说不。

 

男被告说，更多的时候，他只是一个“旁观者”，是一个帮凶。他有时也觉得不该打她，见女死者臀部受重伤，他劝老婆说让她养伤一两个星期，等她伤好后再打她，只是老婆不听劝，只“休息”了两三天就又故态复萌。在接受心理卫生学院精神科医生的诊断时，他也坦言：“我不敢管老婆。”女被告很多次虐打女死者时，他虽然在场但不敢介入。

 

2014年12月29日，他服了过量的药物在家中昏睡不醒，过后被送进邱德拔医院抢救。回家后，女被告竟把死者当出气筒，不断推她打她，死者则不敢反抗还不停道歉。男被告称，他当时因看不惯老婆长期虐打死者，不知如何是好，“服药”麻醉自己。不过，控方反驳说他的这个说法牵强，事实上，在那之后，他并没停止虐打死者。

 

根据控状，男被告除了在在2014年8月至12月之间以及2015年初，动手掌掴和打死者外，案发前两至四周和案发前一天，也用收缩性薄膜（shrink wrap）暴打死者，死者过后断气。法官将在本周五宣判。（人名译音）

 

 

 

[kdash]

this type of man only know how to find excuse

 

The chinese name of the law firm is quite interesting

 

 

 

after this case, maybe the law firm needs to change the chinese name Edited November 29, 2017 by kdash

[Atonchia]

https://www.change.org/p/attorney-general-chambers-singaporean-couple-abuses-intellectually-disabled-woman-to-death?recruiter=838239913&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=share_petition&utm_term=psf_combo_share_initial.combo_new_control_progress_110217winners

 

This is a petition to increase the sentence.

 

At least we know there are 16k who care about others.

[RadX]

Another beast

 

 

http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/boy-4-killed-mothers-heinous-vicious-abuse#cxrecs_s

Boy, 4, killed by mother’s ‘heinous’, ‘vicious’ abuse

 

Noraidah Bte Mohd Yussof. Photo: SPF

Published29 NOVEMBER, 2017

UPDATED 29 NOVEMBER, 2017

• 0 Shares

•  
•  
•  
•  

SINGAPORE — “Vindictive”, “cruel”, “vicious”, and “heinous”. These were some of the words the apex court used to describe the physical abuse a woman subjected her toddler son to, starting from he was just two years and five months old, until he died from the blows he sustained on Aug 1, 2014. He was four years old.

What killed the boy was a head injury, from impact at six areas. But he had 43 other external injuries, ranging from old scars on his forehead, chin, head, and neck, to abrasions and bruises “all over (his) body”, in the court’s words in its grounds of decision released on Wednesday (Nov 29). Five areas of internal bleeding were also found in his tissues.

Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, together with fellow appeal judges Tay Yong Kwang and Steven Chong, had in July upped the woman’s sentence from eight years to 14.5 years on the appeal by prosecutors. In the judgment explaining the court’s decision released on Wednesday (Nov 29), he said simply: “The pain suffered by (the victim) must have been unspeakably severe.”

The woman and her son were not named in the judgment but were previously reported as Noraidah Mohd Yussof and Airyl.

The abuse started sometime in March 2012. When the toddler could not follow Noraidah’s instructions when she was trying to teach him the alphabet, she became irritated and pushed him. She also stepped on his ribs.

Shortly after, he was given some paper to draw on, but the boy scribbled on the sofa instead, angering his mother. She “twisted and pulled (his) hand very hard”.

On March 12, she took Airyl to KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital, where he was admitted until April 2. He had multiple fractures, on his left elbow, left calf, and eighth to 11th ribs. There was also bruising on his forehead and the back of his head, several small bruises on various parts of his body, and healed scars on his lower legs and lower abdomen.

Noraidah lied that his injuries were due to a fall down a flight of stairs at home and an earlier fall at the playground.

Child Protective Service (CPS) stepped in and the boy was cared for by fosterers for three months, before being placed under his maternal relatives’ charge. His mother moved into the same house four months later but there were no further reports of abuse, so the CPS closed the case on Feb 5, 2014.

Noraidah and her two children — she has an older daughter — moved to a flat in Eunos after a while, and on July 30, the abuse resumed.

Because Airyl could not recite certain numbers in Malay, she shoved him until he fell backwards and hit the back of his head against a TV console table.

Later that day, she kicked him in the waist area after he soiled the floor. While he was on the floor, she stood on his stomach with both feet for a few seconds.

Two days later, Noraidah asked her son to recite some numbers again. When he could not do so in Malay, she shouted at him, then ignored him for a while.

After he took a nap, Noraidah made him try again but he failed. She then pushed him, causing him to fall backwards and hit his head on the floor. After he failed several times more, she repeated her actions and he hit his head on the floor again.

She then stepped on her son’s knees with both legs repeatedly three or four times.

Later, she choked him and pushed him to the floor, and also lifted him off the ground by the neck, holding him against the wall.

Seeing that he was gasping for air, she let him go and he fell to the ground, laying still, weak and unresponsive.

Airyl was eventually sent to hospital, where doctors found a blood clot between his skull and brain. After an emergency operation, he remained in a critical condition and was put on life support but developed further complications. Because of the poor prognosis, his family members took him off life support and the boy died.

[Playtime]

 

"While he was on the floor, she stood on his stomach with both feet for a few seconds."

 

Knn... This really.. this would probably be enough to kill any toddler.

While my primal instinct would be just hang her. Can't help thinking there must be some mental issues here. It's just too much to take in..