Singapore Reckless Drivers XIII

[Tohto]

On 2/27/2023 at 12:07 AM, Fcw75 said:

The taxi actually managed to escape unscathed. 👍🏼

Means no free holiday. 😁

Did the cam car manage to avoid? Very very close..

[DOBIEMKZ]

On 2/26/2023 at 10:07 PM, Jamesc said:

 

Five people taken to hospital after accident on PIE.

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/five-people-taken-to-hospital-after-accident-on-pie?dicbo=v2-klyf0er

Chin Hui Shan and Gabrielle Chan

UPDATED 18 FEB 2023, 11:01 PM SGT

A red car collided with a lorry on the PIE towards Changi before the Stevens Road exit. ST PHOTO: LIM YAOHUI

SINGAPORE - Five people were taken to the hospital after a red car collided with a lorry on Saturday afternoon.

Both the police and the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) said they were alerted to the accident on the Pan-Island Expressway towards Changi Airport, before Stevens Road exit, at about 12.20pm.

The police said a 24-year-old female car driver, together with two male passengers, aged 28 and 21, and two female passengers, aged 46 and 22, were conscious when they were taken to the hospital.

The 24-year-old female driver is being investigated for careless driving causing hurt, the police added.

The police investigations are ongoing.

 

 

[SGMCF328]

On 2/25/2023 at 9:57 PM, Jamesc said:

Its not the car, its the driver.

Masak Roti lost to a van!

 

 

Hahahaha

[DOBIEMKZ]

Driver who dragged police officer with Maserati gets his vehicle forfeited

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/driver-dragged-police-maserati-court-forfeited-state-lee-cheng-yan-3307711

"Offenders should not be allowed to transfer ownership of vehicles to avoid forfeiture," said the prosecutor of Lee Cheng Yan's case.

Lydia Lam @LydiaLamCNA

27 Feb 2023 11:03AM (Updated: 27 Feb 2023 11:03AM)

Lee Cheng Yan outside the State Courts on Oct 3, 2019. (Photo: TODAY/Najeer Yusof)

SINGAPORE: A court on Monday (Feb 27) ordered a Maserati used by a man who injured a police officer by dragging him along the road with his vehicle to be forfeited to the state.

This came after Lee Cheng Yan pleaded with the court to have the vehicle returned. His sister also urged the district court to do so, claiming that Lee had promised the car to his parents to cover his hefty legal fees and child support that they had been footing.

In her decision, District Judge Kamala Ponnampalam said that the purported "pledge" of the car, even if done with bona fide intent and not as a means of escaping the forfeiture legislation, does not avert a section in the Road Traffic Act that compels the court to order the vehicle's forfeiture under certain circumstances.

Lee is currently serving a total sentence of about six years and eight months. 

He has two lifetime driving bans - one meted out to him for a 2017 incident where he dragged a police officer who was trapped in his Maserati door along the road. The second was given in 2022 for offences including reoffending by driving while banned and again evading the police.

According to the Road Traffic Act, if a repeat offender uses a vehicle he owns to commit certain offences, the public prosecutor can apply for the vehicle to be forfeited under certain circumstances and the court must order it.

Lee and his sister had tried to get the court to return the Maserati, saying that it had been pledged to Lee's parents as collateral.

According to Lee's sister, the car was promised to his parents under a verbal agreement in 2019 in exchange for sums of money loaned to Lee for his legal fees.

His elderly parents have also been paying to support Lee's two daughters in Japan, she said.

FINAL ARGUMENTS

On Monday, both sides made a final plea to the court for their positions. Lee's sister said she was seeking closure to the case on Monday.

"I just wanted to highlight the incident took place in November 2017 and we are now already living in 2023," she said. 

She said she had been trying to push for a conclusion, and that "I think we all want to move on with our life".

She said that as a taxpayer herself, she did not wish to waste any more resources unnecessarily through further adjournments.

She said that the section of the Road Traffic Act that allows for the forfeiture of vehicles used in certain traffic offences such as Lee's stated that the court can decline to make a forfeiture order if it punishes innocent parties.

She said that life has been extremely difficult for her parents, who are caring for a severely intellectually disabled son aged 42.

She said that "most people in Singapore won't be aware that life is extremely harsh" for such families.

"If they can get back this sum of money, it will go a long way ... and I don't think the law should punish them," she said.

In response, Deputy Public Prosecutor Timotheus Koh said the conditions for the forfeiture of the vehicle have been fulfilled under the Road Traffic Act's relevant provision.

According to Section 43(5) of the Act, the only instances where a court is not to make a forfeiture order as sought by the prosecution are when the offender is not the vehicle owner, or if the offender used the vehicle without the consent of the real owner.

Mr Koh said the vehicle has been fully paid for and that Lee is still the registered owner of the vehicle as recently as July 2022.

He said that while Lee's sister asserts that her parents are the de facto owners of the car, the purported transfer of ownership occurred only after the offence so that the purpose of the forfeiture provision would be frustrated.

"Offenders should not be allowed to transfer ownership of vehicles to avoid forfeiture," he said.

He also said that Lee's sister had attempted to "muddy" the waters here.

In response, Lee's sister disagreed that the transfer of the vehicle was done to "muddy the waters".

"I think there's no doubt that Cheng Yan genuinely believed the vehicle will be returned when he pledged the vehicle as collateral to my parents," she said.

Judge Ponnampalam said that even if Lee's sister's case was taken at its highest, and the court accepts that it was done with a bona fide intent and not as a means of escaping the operation of forfeiture legislature, it still does not avert the operation of the provision in the Road Traffic Act that compels the court to order the forfeiture of the vehicle.

It was used during the offence and Lee was the owner of the vehicle at that time, she said.

Lee, who attended in person in cuffs and prison outfit, interrupted to ask if the other items that were seized would be returned to him.

The prosecutor said he did not have instructions on that but said he would look into it.

Source: CNA/ll(gr)

[Beehive3783]

On 2/24/2023 at 9:07 PM, Mustank said:

Wah piang eh!!!

hope mata make this f**ker drink kopi deep deep

 

This type of farker no need give kopi la.. give toilet bowl water can liao

[Beehive3783]

On 2/24/2023 at 9:12 PM, Jamesc said:

Self porno video

 

 

Obviously a Q cutter yet trying to justify his actions, what a retard  

[Beehive3783]

On 2/25/2023 at 12:09 AM, Ct3833 said:

so unlucky, so many cars didnt pay road tax, only his car get towed. 

 

 

I think he suay to get caught while vehicle is parked. Probably parking warden got an alert on the system while issuing parking ticket, so follow up to get the bounty by calling tow truck. 

Hosay liao KPI gao gao  

[Beehive3783]

On 2/25/2023 at 7:25 AM, richard_crl032 said:

Why ? I thought the car also did not signalled his intention to turn right ? 

He did lost his life .... and already even many simplepore drivers here are too lazy and dumb of not signalling but not being penalised while getting innocent drivers into trouble 😒

Cheers.

 

Did you forget your basic theory? Double white line. No overtaking allowed. So what if the car did or did not signal?

[ER-3682]

On 2/27/2023 at 11:31 AM, DOBIEMKZ said:

Driver who dragged police officer with Maserati gets his vehicle forfeited

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/driver-dragged-police-maserati-court-forfeited-state-lee-cheng-yan-3307711

"Offenders should not be allowed to transfer ownership of vehicles to avoid forfeiture," said the prosecutor of Lee Cheng Yan's case.

Lydia Lam @LydiaLamCNA

27 Feb 2023 11:03AM (Updated: 27 Feb 2023 11:03AM)

Lee Cheng Yan outside the State Courts on Oct 3, 2019. (Photo: TODAY/Najeer Yusof)

SINGAPORE: A court on Monday (Feb 27) ordered a Maserati used by a man who injured a police officer by dragging him along the road with his vehicle to be forfeited to the state.

This came after Lee Cheng Yan pleaded with the court to have the vehicle returned. His sister also urged the district court to do so, claiming that Lee had promised the car to his parents to cover his hefty legal fees and child support that they had been footing.

In her decision, District Judge Kamala Ponnampalam said that the purported "pledge" of the car, even if done with bona fide intent and not as a means of escaping the forfeiture legislation, does not avert a section in the Road Traffic Act that compels the court to order the vehicle's forfeiture under certain circumstances.

Lee is currently serving a total sentence of about six years and eight months. 

He has two lifetime driving bans - one meted out to him for a 2017 incident where he dragged a police officer who was trapped in his Maserati door along the road. The second was given in 2022 for offences including reoffending by driving while banned and again evading the police.

According to the Road Traffic Act, if a repeat offender uses a vehicle he owns to commit certain offences, the public prosecutor can apply for the vehicle to be forfeited under certain circumstances and the court must order it.

Lee and his sister had tried to get the court to return the Maserati, saying that it had been pledged to Lee's parents as collateral.

According to Lee's sister, the car was promised to his parents under a verbal agreement in 2019 in exchange for sums of money loaned to Lee for his legal fees.

His elderly parents have also been paying to support Lee's two daughters in Japan, she said.

FINAL ARGUMENTS

On Monday, both sides made a final plea to the court for their positions. Lee's sister said she was seeking closure to the case on Monday.

"I just wanted to highlight the incident took place in November 2017 and we are now already living in 2023," she said. 

She said she had been trying to push for a conclusion, and that "I think we all want to move on with our life".

She said that as a taxpayer herself, she did not wish to waste any more resources unnecessarily through further adjournments.

She said that the section of the Road Traffic Act that allows for the forfeiture of vehicles used in certain traffic offences such as Lee's stated that the court can decline to make a forfeiture order if it punishes innocent parties.

She said that life has been extremely difficult for her parents, who are caring for a severely intellectually disabled son aged 42.

She said that "most people in Singapore won't be aware that life is extremely harsh" for such families.

"If they can get back this sum of money, it will go a long way ... and I don't think the law should punish them," she said.

In response, Deputy Public Prosecutor Timotheus Koh said the conditions for the forfeiture of the vehicle have been fulfilled under the Road Traffic Act's relevant provision.

According to Section 43(5) of the Act, the only instances where a court is not to make a forfeiture order as sought by the prosecution are when the offender is not the vehicle owner, or if the offender used the vehicle without the consent of the real owner.

Mr Koh said the vehicle has been fully paid for and that Lee is still the registered owner of the vehicle as recently as July 2022.

He said that while Lee's sister asserts that her parents are the de facto owners of the car, the purported transfer of ownership occurred only after the offence so that the purpose of the forfeiture provision would be frustrated.

"Offenders should not be allowed to transfer ownership of vehicles to avoid forfeiture," he said.

He also said that Lee's sister had attempted to "muddy" the waters here.

In response, Lee's sister disagreed that the transfer of the vehicle was done to "muddy the waters".

"I think there's no doubt that Cheng Yan genuinely believed the vehicle will be returned when he pledged the vehicle as collateral to my parents," she said.

Judge Ponnampalam said that even if Lee's sister's case was taken at its highest, and the court accepts that it was done with a bona fide intent and not as a means of escaping the operation of forfeiture legislature, it still does not avert the operation of the provision in the Road Traffic Act that compels the court to order the forfeiture of the vehicle.

It was used during the offence and Lee was the owner of the vehicle at that time, she said.

Lee, who attended in person in cuffs and prison outfit, interrupted to ask if the other items that were seized would be returned to him.

The prosecutor said he did not have instructions on that but said he would look into it.

Source: CNA/ll(gr)

Orbee👍👍👍👍🤣🤣🤣🤣

[Fitvip]

On 2/26/2023 at 11:13 AM, Jamesc said:

AMAP/LTA say can ride across.

But they never say cannot get hit by car

or fall down and hurt yourself.

Everyone got free advice.

Some advice is smarter than others!

By saying that they can ride across, it shifts much of the responsibility to drivers!

[Beehive3783]

On 2/26/2023 at 3:27 PM, Kyrios said:

 

So that's where ALL the patrol cars are. Been looking for them high and low for a long time  

[DOBIEMKZ]

On 2/27/2023 at 11:55 AM, ER-3682 said:

Orbee👍👍👍👍🤣🤣🤣🤣

Will govt auction off the Maserati! And where to buy? 😁

Or will govt scrap the car and release COE?

[Fitvip]

On 2/26/2023 at 11:16 AM, Jamesc said:

Everyone in SG think they are damn smart.

I agree with them.

But they got wisdom or not?

They are smudged lah!

Wisdom, must have if they have wisdom teeth!

[Beehive3783]

On 2/26/2023 at 8:05 PM, Jamesc said:

 

 

Maybe they were trying to stop him for the broken rear window  

[Beehive3783]

On 2/26/2023 at 10:07 PM, Jamesc said:

 

If really p-plater, better to take away the driving license. Small car big ego? Can't filter behind the truck? Lol

[Beehive3783]

On 2/26/2023 at 10:13 PM, Atonchia said:

But TP don't chase drugs. Some more all TP, bikes and patrol cars.

Guilty conscience la.. maybe only speeding but hauling drugs. So run to evade detection of drugs?

Edited February 27, 2023 by Beehive3783

[Fitvip]

On 2/26/2023 at 3:47 PM, mersaylee said:

Now I know why no TP on other roads...😂

Only if also catch those siam road tax, siam insurance and evade parking aholes...😁

These are not their responsibilities!

[Ody_2004]

On 2/27/2023 at 12:04 PM, Beehive3783 said:

If really p-plater, better to take away the driving license. Small car big ego? Can't filter behind the truck? Lol

That's why some girls never go jungle before see BIG SNAKEs before... once they saw one they be scare for life! whahahahahaha..

Joke aside lah.. my wife license 20 years.. still dare not go expressway.. my daughter.. first day get license oredi hit the expressway without my knowledge.. alot of time they believe their friends very good in guiding them..