just like the camping in sembawang case,
what TOC says is in public domain
and may cause a counter-reaction by the govt.

Personally, the death penalty does not reduce crime.

Instead look at how the judicial process has been set up.

I am looking at it from a laymen who is not legally trained because the majority of us are not lawyers.

Every infraction of the law has been so finely categorised.

A minimum sentence has been put in all of them. The print media does a wonderful job when it comes reporting about the courts and how minimum sentence has ensured an efficent judiciary.

An excellent illustration is 20 grams of heroin. Have it and you are assured death

Any visitor entering Singapore can understand it so well. The ones who choose not to understan have just lost their life. The prosecutors have got their job cut out for them.

An easy day in the court.and a fat salary.

As for the ones who are ignorant by reason of sanity or illiteracy, they too took a gamble but now have given the prosecutors a headache that can be cured with an over the counter pain releiver.

There is no iffs and buts about it.

Lawyers will of course not agree with me.

The judges have the work so cut out for them.

The prosecutors have to only ensure the paperwork i.e. evidence of 20 grammes is set in stone.

The lawyers for the accused can argue all they can. In fact the mundane court room is brought alive.

When the judge sits down to prepare the verdict there is only one thing to look at the evidence .

By having this type of mechanical process, the judges are protected from being accused of being partial or corrupt. They have more time to indulge in other interests away from the bench.

This has been the norm for the past thirty years or may be more.

It will take another thirty years to dismantle this set up so that judges will have to really consider all the sides of the argument before delivering a verdict.

Then another thirty years to put into practice.

A total of ninety years or three generations.

In the Internet Arena all these can take place immediately but realistically that is not so in Singapore..

I am already fifty and I don’t think I will live to the age of 140 to see this happen.

“Reek” implies that something smells strongly unpleasant. Is TOC saying that the court’s reasoning suffers from a surfeit of liberal sentiment? If not, better choose your words more carefully next time.