Brother Lee Lip Hong "RIP"

[dk1903]

one of our comrades has fallen. . .
ex-principal Lee Lip Hong was mercilessly given a 9-week jail term.

basically it was just a case of being at the wrong place, at the wrong time.
and this could have happened to any brother here.
i still remember that I almost called "Mr Teo" too because the photos he posted on the web were simply fantastic!

the jail term is probably the last of his worries actually.
i mean imagine the way the public has scrutinised him and the pressure his wife must have given him.
all these troubles just to fulfill the materialistic needs of a 17 yr old who has gone scot-free!
once again, the court has proven to us that there is no justice!

a toast to brother Lee - at least he had the courage to be the first to plea guilty!
now that he and his wife are renewing their wedding vows, just hope that everything can start afresh for them!

[doctorpeter]

I know this Lee Lip Hong too, he was a great teacher and he does not deserve this 9 weeks jail term imo. Hope you are able to recover from this honest mistake and move on with life, Lip Hong.

[asdfghjkl]

one of my peers in NYJC.. he was always in a leadership position.. sad to hear that he was in jail and how fast NYJC removed him from their website.. :(

[Gunas]

He could have gotten 7 years jail term, but instead only 9 weeks. A 97.5% discount for a statutory RAPE sentence.

What a steal.
__________________________________________________ _______

one of my peers in NYJC.. he was always in a leadership position.. sad to hear that he was in jail and how fast NYJC removed him from their website.. :(

[TitoVito]

He could have gotten 7 years jail term, but instead only 9 weeks. A 97.5% discount for a statutory RAPE sentence.

What a steal.
__________________________________________________ _______

His sentence will probably be the lightest amongst all the 80 men. There are rumours that the minimum sentence is 4 months for those claiming trial. Any lawyers here can confirm?

[sgjoey]

He could have gotten 7 years jail term, but instead only 9 weeks. A 97.5% discount for a statutory RAPE sentence.

What a steal.
__________________________________________________ _______

Nope. Going by precedents, the sentences range from a couple of months to about nine months. So he got off relatively lightly, but not as light as all that.

Though the maximum sentence is stated as 7 years, that is not meted out unless there are extraordinary circumstances such as the use of violence etc. The man was not charged for statutory rape, for goodness sake. That only applies if the girl is under 16. He was charged under Section 376B -- having sex with an underaged sex worker.

Any jail time is in fact already manifestly excessive. Because the judge has the option of just ordering a fine.

I am still nonpulussed how a man can be jailed when there was no intent to commit anything, though the law was undoubtedly broken.

In any case, that law itself is of questionable merit.

[alexbi]

Yeah, his reputation is going to be ruined by this girl and a moment of weakness. I may not know him personally, but he left an impression on me. For one, he pleaded guilty straight on. Then when he appeared on the news, he walked out calmly without covering his face or running. Respect to him for that. I feel pity for the guys who got charged, as far as i'm concerned she's a hardcore prostitute who was willing to sell her body. She doesn't need any protection at all.

[asdfghjkl]

i think the max term of 7 years is meant for worst case, like sex with 1-2 year old? thats a disgusting. but a girl at 16 years old would be fully developed and capable of having full steamy sex. :eek:

[francolin]

It could have happened to anyone. To err is human. Sometimes wrong is just a small step away. Just a nudge from someone and we will fall into the other side.

[2centsworth]

Prosecutor asked for 3 month (12 week sentence). Judge gave 9 weeks. With 1/3 remission, he will be out in 6 weeks. I wonder if he can spend the last 4 weeks under Home Detention where he wears a tag on his ankle. Glad his wife forgave him and renewed their vows. Important he has support behind him now.

I think he was a secondary school principal? If he is, then despite being a principal of a school of teenagers, he wasn't able to differentiate between a 17 and 19 year old. What are the chances that the rest of the 47 guys will suspect the girl is underage?

[KinderBueno]

ex-principal Lee Lip Hong was mercilessly given a 9-week jail term.

I hope the rest of the 47 men will not curse and swear at Lee Lip Hong.

Why?

One man has received the sentence which means all 47 men most likely will loss apeal for jail sentence. In another words, everybody must go jail.

One person has gone to jail, nobody can escape that. :(

I sympathise those people involved.. Subhas Anandan and many lawyers representing clients may be upset with Lee Lip Hong.

[stone08]

Cannot blame this first conviction , previous cases already got convictions.

[Apocalypse]

He has powerful friends that write testimony for him. Let's see where the next powerful testimony will come from.

[sun814]

no sympaties for such a man, only god knows what he will do to his students if he is not caught and still be the principal of that school! he should get the maximum sentence! :mad:

[hole_me]

how about the girl?
she is free, the gov didn't charge her?

[joker88]

He could have gotten 7 years jail term, but instead only 9 weeks. A 97.5% discount for a statutory RAPE sentence.

What a steal.

7 years is only a provision, not a common sight.

For goodness sake, there is no statutory RAPE lah bro. :confused:
Statutory RAPE is for under 16 lah. :rolleyes:

We are toking abt commercial sex here lah.

Nope. Going by precedents, the sentences range from a couple of months to about nine months. So he got off relatively lightly, but not as light as all that.

Though the maximum sentence is stated as 7 years, that is not meted out unless there are extraordinary circumstances such as the use of violence etc. The man was not charged for statutory rape, for goodness sake. That only applies if the girl is under 16. He was charged under Section 376B -- having sex with an underaged sex worker.

Any jail time is in fact already manifestly excessive. Because the judge has the option of just ordering a fine.

I am still nonpulussed how a man can be jailed when there was no intent to commit anything, though the law was undoubtedly broken.

In any case, that law itself is of questionable merit.

I think you are right that section 376B is broken.

But more importantly, he admitted to having paid sex and plead guilty.
I think we missed one pt here. He gave up his rights for trial.

There rest have not and the DPP has to prove that they pay her for escort svcs and also discreet svcs.
What fraction is for escort and what fraction is for discreet svcs or none at all?

It seems that many bros here are not aware of what is the line of defence now.
Read my last post below and give me your views. :)

Many bros here are toking abt the sentences of the others even before the trial begins.
You dun go to a trial and plead guilty and then ask for lighter or no jail sentence. That is mitigation.
Your lawyers can negotiate in a PTC (pre-trial conference) if that is the case.
If you admit to fxxking her then why claim trial, might as well plead guilty.
They must be clear of what is their defence now. Misled abt age and ignorance is no use now.

Some may say that it is almost common sense but I beg to differ.
If you get caught in the health centre when the masseuse is massaging you, can they also say that it is common sense that you are going to pay to fxxk her also?

Read my posts below and you will know that there are ppl who engage escorts but did not fxxk them.
Many reasons, one reason can be the price for fxxking is too high.
Remember they pay for escort svc and not necessary pay for fxxking.

The gal was advertised as an escort and not as a pros and the payment is for escort svcs although discreet svcs can be offered.
They engage her as an escort and not as a pros.
The DPP has to prove how much is for escort svcs and any discreet svcs offered and accepted?
This is their only defence now.

I think their chances are quite low but then you never know.
If you plead guilty, then jail is definite.

It is a gamble but the odds are not good.

Read my posts below and give me your views.

http://www.sammyboyforum.com/showthread.php?p=7155786&highlight=#post7155786

http://www.sammyboyforum.com/showthread.php?p=7155812&highlight=#post7155812

http://www.sammyboyforum.com/showthread.php?p=7155812&highlight=#post7155812

http://www.sammyboyforum.com/showthread.php?p=7156821&highlight=#post7156821

i think the max term of 7 years is meant for worst case, like sex with 1-2 year old? thats a disgusting. but a girl at 16 years old would be fully developed and capable of having full steamy sex.

Agree bro. 7 years is for extreme cases involving force or doing inhuman acts. :eek:

[bendal]

In fact he probably get "heavier" sentence. As person working in education, the courts will deem him as having more responsibility.
There are still chance for the others to get less sentence. This is going to be a very interesting case to test out this section of the law. Especially those in 2nd batch, with war-chest of millions of dollars.

[sgjoey]

i think the max term of 7 years is meant for worst case, like sex with 1-2 year old? thats a disgusting. but a girl at 16 years old would be fully developed and capable of having full steamy sex. :eek:

Just to clarify, that seven year stipulated sentence is the maximum that a judge can mete out under Section 376B -- commercial sex with an underaged worker, presumably above 16, but below 18. It cannot be for having sex with babies! If the girl had been below 16, it would not be Section 376B but 376A, having sex with someone below 16 -- also known as statutory rape, whether or not consent was given.

However it is common for judges to mete out sentences that are much lighter than the maximum. This is so not just for Section 376B but for all criminal offences.

And judges go by precedents -- what their colleagues have meted out in roughly similar offences. So there is no way that any of the men can be sentenced to more than 9 months, unless there are certain special circumstances that would merit a heavier sentence.

[sgjoey]

no sympaties for such a man, only god knows what he will do to his students if he is not caught and still be the principal of that school! he should get the maximum sentence! :mad:

That is an unfair statement. The man paid for sexual services. He didn't rape or molest anyone. He was just unlucky that the girl was represented as above 18 but was in fact below 18.

[ataraxia]

He was overwhelmed by guilt.

[bendal]

I think the government is trying to move Singapore to Tier 1 in the human trafficking report. One of the point is the government must actively discourage prostitution. If you notice the pattern, 2010, Singapore moved to tier 2 watch list, then out of sudden all the crackdown started. Last year moved up to tier 2. So, they probably hoping to be put to tier 1 this year.

[sun814]

for me, he does deserve any sympathies at all as he was the principal of a school and had 2,000 plus students under his care, what was he thinking when he had sex (whether paid or not does not matter to me) with a girl of such a young age?

[dream888]

This could happen to all of us too, just glad that I don't have $500 plus to spend on one single girl session in 2010. 9 weeks jail is relatively a short sentence as the usual norm for such cases is at least 3 months as judged by the previous cases. He is already punished enough. I wish him all the best in the future.

[asdfghjkl]

i take it he made what seems to be a rational decision then, bonk a young FL that looks like one of the chio bu in his school. better than molesting one of the 2000. i dun look down on him.

[kuasimi]

http://temasektimes.wordpress.com/2012/04/27/baey-yam-keng-penned-his-name-on-petition-to-vouch-for-lee-lip-hongs-character-in-court/

Baey Yam Keng penned his name on petition to vouch for Lee Lip Hong’s character in court



Former Pei Chun Public School principal Lee Lip Hong may have disappointed many Singaporeans by having commercial sex with a minor, but he still retain the loyal support of some friends and prominent public figures in Singapore, including PAP MP for Tampines GRC Baey Yam Keng.

33 former colleagues, students and friends of Lee penned their names down on a petition pleading for leniency on his behalf which was presented to the judge this morning.

Instead of asking Lee to reflect on his own behavior, Baey Yam Keng expressed his support for him in the petition willingly without much thoughts.

Speaking to queries from the media, Mr Baey, who was the President of the Singapore Volleyball Association said:

“Though he (Lee) spent only a short period of time in the Association, he had made tremendous contributions to it.”

When NUS PRC scholar Sun Xu called Singaporeans ‘dogs’ two months ago, Mr Baey immediately asked Singaporeans to ‘reflect’ on their own behavior, sparking a massive outcry which he later apologized for in Parliament.

[MarsIswar]

for me, he does deserve any sympathies at all as he was the principal of a school and had 2,000 plus students under his care, what was he thinking when he had sex (whether paid or not does not matter to me) with a girl of such a young age?

dun judge ppl dude, everyone have commited a mistake before, at least he have the guts to face his own mistake, over is over water under the bridge, give people a chance dun nail people to the cross...

[DJ Adriano]

Bro Lee shouldn't go to jail at all. He has done nothing wrong or hurt anyone (except his wife) in this whole saga.

And a stupid driver who killed a motorcyclist recently and seriously injured his pillion wife only got 1 week of jail sentence compared to our wronged bro!!

The 48 bros shouldn't be shamed and put through such massive suffering just for having sex with a willing minor. I saw how pathetic they look on TV when running away from the media outside the court rooms. This is just very wrong. Some of our MPs must stand up to fight for these bros!!

[peanut123]

no sympaties for such a man, only god knows what he will do to his students if he is not caught and still be the principal of that school! he should get the maximum sentence! :mad:


Oh come on. By that logic, all the guys here in this forum would be raping and molesting their 20+ year old colleagues and friends, since they love bonking 20 year old WLs. Pure nonsense.

[peanut123]

This could happen to all of us too, just glad that I don't have $500 plus to spend on one single girl session in 2010. 9 weeks jail is relatively a short sentence as the usual norm for such cases is at least 3 months as judged by the previous cases. He is already punished enough. I wish him all the best in the future.

Yes, it could happen to anyone. And it doesn't have to be online hookers.

You could get a Indo streetwalker and be called up a few days later just because she lied to you about her age. This happened to a guy in the news a few days ago with a Viet streetwalker who lied about her age. She was caught a few days later and her former customers were called up and charged.

Scary. The issue is that the law does not recognize being conned by the girl/OKT as a valid reason.

Every time I read more info about this online case, I curse and swear at the OKT and the girl for knowingly dragging their clients into this deep shit. I am especially pissed off that these poor guys probably paid premium prices thinking that it would be safer and more discreet, and yet it was the most dangerous and most publicly humiliating outcome possible. Curse the OKT and the slut for this. Not only did they destroy the lives and reputations of their customers, but they've also probably caused the AV to step up their anti-vice campaigns.

[owl888]

I hope the rest of the 47 men will not curse and swear at Lee Lip Hong.

Why?

One man has received the sentence which means all 47 men most likely will loss apeal for jail sentence. In another words, everybody must go jail.

One person has gone to jail, nobody can escape that. :(

I sympathise those people involved.. Subhas Anandan and many lawyers representing clients may be upset with Lee Lip Hong.

If he never plead guilty maybe everyone got chance to escape with a fine. Heard he no need to work in jail coz his term is short. Furthermore, most likely he'll not got the chance to meet the 47 men in jail (most likely he'll discharged before their trials are over!) else he sure kena bash up by them :D

[BLseven]

for me, he does deserve any sympathies at all as he was the principal of a school and had 2,000 plus students under his care, what was he thinking when he had sex (whether paid or not does not matter to me) with a girl of such a young age?


to bro sun814, since your joining date is 2003, i assume you're quite old liao, just a ques, had u never and intentionally never bonk FL or WL HALF or near half your age till today...?? i think every man who will surf here needs sexual services paid or foc regardless of their vocation, so please not be so subjectively biases and make this kind of judgemental comments.

anyway i think any man who have the courage to do what he did are a real MAN. do you think you would have truthfully be able to do what Lee did if you're in his shoe??

"let those with no sin throw the 1st stone, which i guess anyone with nick here dun qualify....certainly not an old 2003 bird like u... haha. cheers and chiong safely :)

[sun814]

to bro sun814, since your joining date is 2003, i assume you're quite old liao, just a ques, had u never and intentionally never bonk FL or WL HALF or near half your age till today...?? i think every man who will surf here needs sexual services paid or foc regardless of their vocation, so please not be so subjectively biases and make this kind of judgemental comments.

anyway i think any man who have the courage to do what he did are a real MAN. do you think you would have truthfully be able to do what Lee did if you're in his shoe??

"let those with no sin throw the 1st stone, which i guess anyone with nick here dun qualify....certainly not an old 2003 bird like u... haha. cheers and chiong safely :)

hehe, i can tell u i have never thought of having sex with any woman half my age or even nearly half my age, as i cannot imagine making love to anyone who can be my daughter (incidentally my daughter is 17 this year - same age as that pro).

haha as for his reaction in and outside court, it is just very natural after so much publicity, do u think he has much choice? i bet most bros would do the same if u were in his shoes.

but he still cannot be forgiven for what he has done as he had so many students under his care. rather i admire his wife for so forgiving.

[Megafan1981]

hehe, i can tell u i have never thought of having sex with any woman half my age or even nearly half my age, as i cannot imagine making love to anyone who can be my daughter (incidentally my daughter is 17 this year - same age as that pro).

haha as for his reaction in and outside court, it is just very natural after so much publicity, do u think he has much choice? i bet most bros would do the same if u were in his shoes.

but he still cannot be forgiven for what he has done as he had so many students under his care. rather i admire his wife for so forgiving.

Visiting a prostitute or gambling is not a crime. It is in legalized in singapore in case your high moral grounds cloud your facts. if the prostitute is of legal age, there wouldn't even be a case cuz it is perfectly legal!

The only crime he committed was to screw an underaged hardcore prostitute, who deliberately lied her age in order to gain quick access to fulfill her materialistic desires.

One can argue its immoral and unprofessional as a teacher but certainly not illegal if he went around screwing prostitutes!

[asdfghjkl]

if the prostitute is of legal age, there wouldn't even be a case cuz it is perfectly legal!

she was 17 at that time. for this case, one might argue if he have sex with her as her BFF.. no offense under the law.. :o

[tamtam]

no sympaties for such a man, only god knows what he will do to his students if he is not caught and still be the principal of that school! he should get the maximum sentence! :mad:


I personally think that anyone holding any position in life has got no direct link to his/her sexuality. It must be treated seperately.

This guy fixed up a deal with her, didnt expect the deal turns out to be against the law, even thou she consent for it, he did not rape her, not even molest her, just a simple deal between both parties.

I dont think he is doing any thing wrong here, there are alot of reasons why mens do it outside, maybe the wives should play a part in these.

Do you know that ORAL sex is illegal in SG by law, even when its done with the legal wives. So a point to ponder, is all the law makers out there didn't have oral with their wife at all ? Or is this a deep dark secret, kept only by their wife ? What if the wife files a complain in the police station, then these people should be given the max sentence, coz they break their own laws.

The Law itself is very funny, girls at 16 is legal to have sex, but pros, must reached 18, is there a govt dept/registry who keeps track on any girl whom wanted to become a pros between 16 to 18 yrs of age ? What happens if she were to have sex after 16 but changed her mind to become a pros before 18 ?Then she can openly blackmail all the have slept with her from her 16 to 18 years of age period.

Everybody make mistakes when comes to sex, it range from past history politicians to modern, ones like Clinton, Prince C, etc...but all is based on consent from the women side.

So you cannot judge this principal that he will have the bad intentions of creating any harms to his students, i myself have many early twenties cousins, hot bodies and big boobs, but everytime we come for families gathering, i dont feel anything, my naughty bro down there switches off completely. And you know nowadays how those SYTs dress up, so little right?

Do you know what the LAW should change ?

They should changed to :
It is illegal not to make love to your lawful husband, at least once a week, when he has provide the family with adquate income... All offenders will be jail for a day with their hair cut till above shoulder level.

Or, It is illegal for all married couples to have sex outside their marriage, offenders both men and women, must go to jail. ( You will see at least 40% singaporean ends up in jail, Changi prison will be as big as Tampines)

Then we will all see a sharp drop in divorce, better familes relations, more homely husbands, more loving wives and so forth...

[2centsworth]

I hope the rest of the 47 men will not curse and swear at Lee Lip Hong.

One man has received the sentence which means all 47 men most likely will loss apeal for jail sentence. In another words, everybody must go jail.

One person has gone to jail, nobody can escape that. :(

This isn't the first case of underage commercial sex. The judge will use the earlier cases for reference too. You can't blame the principal for pleading guilty. In fact, you should thank him. The lawyers for the other 47 will know what the judge is thinking about these cases and can prepare better arguments.

I personally think that anyone holding any position in life has got no direct link to his/her sexuality. It must be treated seperately..

Unfortunately I don't think this is the case. Your job does influence the outcome. I think the senior police officer will get the worst sentence. He clearly knows the law and he broke it. Others can claim they don't know the law. My friends in police describe such a situation as 'change uniform', from the uniform of the policeman to the uniform of the prisoner. Change uniform is a very big deal.

[squirt]

I always have a thought that the girl was already of legal age by March 2011, why was the clamp down only happening in December 2011? There might be someone who leak the transactions to the police to sabo some one from the 48 people.

Can you imagine how Lee had felt when he last F her in Dec 2010 and then one year later, someone from police called him to inform him that he will be charged for Fking someone 1 year ago?

[sleepy80]

I feel pity for the guys who got charged, as far as i'm concerned she's a hardcore prostitute who was willing to sell her body. She doesn't need any protection at all.

Oh.. You are the lawyer Subhas Anandan... Here to report news. :o

[merlinton]

I always have a thought that the girl was already of legal age by March 2011, why was the clamp down only happening in December 2011? There might be someone who leak the transactions to the police to sabo some one from the 48 people.

Can you imagine how Lee had felt when he last F her in Dec 2010 and then one year later, someone from police called him to inform him that he will be charged for Fking someone 1 year ago?

I don't think this is a leak. The intel of men-in-blue (MIB) is very strong. It is so strong that at the moment you stepped out of Min Wah with an underaged Viet, you are caught immediately.
http://thecourtroom.stomp.com.sg/stomp/courtroom/case_of_the_day/891132/man_had_paid_sex_with_underage_vietnamese_girl.htm l

Regarding why the clamp down is only happening recently.. Well my guess is like most organizations, they store good things for non-peak periods or for times when they lack publicity/achievements.

[hello420]

Too bad the girl goes off scot free.
The laws are all biased against men. This is not the dark ages where women were discriminated against. Now women are at par with men. So why law should treat them preferentially. Infact at least for these city teens who move around with "Fuck me" written all over their face and dressing, the law should be same as it is for men.

BTW why RIP? He is still alive.

[sun814]

I personally hope that the other men would get at least 6 months jail term for not showing any remorse and regrets.

[sun814]

I know this Lee Lip Hong too, he was a great teacher and he does not deserve this 9 weeks jail term imo. Hope you are able to recover from this honest mistake and move on with life, Lip Hong.

haha, would you dare to entrust your child to under his care? he is just a beast under his suit.

[nuclearkid]

This blogger (http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2012/04/plight-of-60-immoral-men-part-2.html) pointed out the following, which is little different from our local case and worth your time:

"I looked around to check versions of similar laws in other countries. In a case involving French footballers, the police dropped the case when they were satisfied the men did not know the girl was underage"

He further added:

The judge insisted that the onus is on the man to check:

"Given the circumstances, Lee's suspicion ought to have been aroused and he should have asked for proof of her age, the judge said. "Had she refused to show identification, he should have walked away".....

In all, a well-thought out piece I felt worth sharing.

I personally hope that the other men would get at least 6 months jail term for not showing any remorse and regrets.

The names of these chaps have been thoroughly dragged through the mud and picking up the pieces upon release should be their concern, rather than jail sentence itself.

In my opinion, they got snooked and have not done anything wrong or harmful to anyone. One can only hope society gives them a fair chance to rebuild their lives, especially the less wealthy ones.

[Big Sexy]

that is not correct....
Lee was sentenced to jail because he pleaded guilty so there is no need for a trial..
for the rest.. if they could put up a good fight then they could well be acquitted...
u didnt think the other 47 are dumb .. did you??



One man has received the sentence which means all 47 men most likely will loss apeal for jail sentence. In another words, everybody must go jail.

One person has gone to jail, nobody can escape that. :(

[Big Sexy]

how do u know that they have got no remorse and regrets???
challenging the case doesnt meant they have got no remorse or regrets..
it merely means that they are contesting the charges.. that's all....


I personally hope that the other men would get at least 6 months jail term for not showing any remorse and regrets.

[whitecat]

Let sit back and look at the issue of all these men again. It is all about need . They are some one who can't show their face in gl and thinking Internet is safe , and get caught by this. And honestly how many people actually know that to bang a 17 years old girls is illegal . I think this is beyond common sense . I think this group of bro are just being unluck . Being use as example . I think the law is too harsh .

[bangbangben]

haha, would you dare to entrust your child to under his care? he is just a beast under his suit.

I guess anyone that comes into this forum has around shown their sexually beastly side.
If not, there is always flower pod eh? ;)

[5whcqxhq]

I personally hope that the other men would get at least 6 months jail term for not showing any remorse and regrets.

Buddy, this is a harsh statement. They did not intentionally engage the service of the girl knowing she was below 18, most would back off otherwise. Rather it is the pimp, Tang who should be wholly responsible for advertising her service presumably knowing she was below 18. Furthermore, the girl is a willing partner in this trade, not like she is confined in a room and forced to provide a service.

[dream888]

This is a witch hunt to warn all of us about sleeping with underaged prostitutes. Just remember this case and the underage Vietnamese girl case so that we don't make the same mistakes in the future.

[sun814]

how do u know that they have got no remorse and regrets???
challenging the case doesnt meant they have got no remorse or regrets..
it merely means that they are contesting the charges.. that's all....

hehe, they would not be contesting the charges if they regretted or be remorseful about what they had done.

[Big Sexy]

mate, you need to get things in order..
they are contesting it because they feel they have a case..
they didnt know the girl was underage..
it have got nothing to do with them not feeling remorseful or not..

now if you could...
can you tell us your source from where you got to know that they did not regret and felt remorseful for what they did..



hehe, they would not be contesting the charges if they regretted or be remorseful about what they had done.

[tutuho]

Buddy, this is a harsh statement. They did not intentionally engage the service of the girl knowing she was below 18, most would back off otherwise.

Brader, you very sure boh?

[Poet]

mate, you need to get things in order..
they are contesting it because they feel they have a case..
they didnt know the girl was underage..
it have got nothing to do with them not feeling remorseful or not..

now if you could...
can you tell us your source from where you got to know that they did not regret and felt remorseful for what they did..

You are right. One swan does not a summer makes.

[SH149]

I personally think that anyone holding any position in life has got no direct link to his/her sexuality. It must be treated seperately.

This guy fixed up a deal with her, didnt expect the deal turns out to be against the law, even thou she consent for it, he did not rape her, not even molest her, just a simple deal between both parties.

I dont think he is doing any thing wrong here, there are alot of reasons why mens do it outside, maybe the wives should play a part in these.

Do you know that ORAL sex is illegal in SG by law, even when its done with the legal wives. So a point to ponder,

Bro oral sex had been legalized now

[gojiberry123]

He could have gotten 7 years jail term, but instead only 9 weeks. A 97.5% discount for a statutory RAPE sentence.

What a steal.
__________________________________________________ _______

Get your facts right.

Statutory Rape
"Any person who has carnal connection with any girl below the age of 16 years except by way of marriage is guilty of an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment of up to five years and a fine not exceeding S$10,000."

AND

Commercial sex with minor under 18
"Any person who obtains for consideration the sexual services of a person, who is under 18 years of age, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 7 years, or with fine, or with both."

"Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

[asdfghjkl]

what if the men did not have sex with the girl but oral sex? still illegal? any one knows? :confused:

[SH149]

what if the men did not have sex with the girl but oral sex? still illegal? any one knows? :confused:

If I remember correctly the law already changed cos it's very common nowsday by having oral sex only but no sexual intercourse involved

Correct me if I am wrong :)

[sun814]

i am really appalled to see that so many bros still support these men who have sex with a young girl, just wondering if you all have any children? :( if anyone of u have children and still support them, really shame on you.

[Apocalypse]

what if the men did not have sex with the girl but oral sex? still illegal? any one knows? :confused:

oral sex is classified in the same catagory as sex, in the "sex with underaged sex worker" section.

[Apocalypse]

If I remember correctly the law already changed cos it's very common nowsday by having oral sex only but no sexual intercourse involved

Correct me if I am wrong :)

Parliment had a debate, and they decide to adopt a soft approach to the oral sex law. As long as there is no payment and monetary exchanges, it ok to do anything. it is 2 different set of law, for comercial and non comercial sex.

[asdfghjkl]

how old must a girl be before her sexual activities become digusting to people? in japan, its 13. are all the japanese sick to vote in such a government?

how would you feel if the PAP decides to increase it to 30, or lower it to 13?

[SH149]

Parliment had a debate, and they decide to adopt a soft approach to the oral sex law. As long as there is no payment and monetary exchanges, it ok to do anything. it is 2 different set of law, for comercial and non comercial sex.

Tks for the info

[Big Sexy]

Mate ..In your opinion.. what is your acceptable age for a gal to engage in sexual activities.??

maybe u should write to the sg government and suggest to
Them to increase the legal age for gals to engage in sexual activities.
afterall they were the ones who thinks 18 is ok. If we go by your argument then perhaps the PAP should be ashame of themselves for letting such a law pass thru...

Matter of fact is there are load of countries beside sg who thinks 18 years old is the acceptable age for a gal to have sex..

i am really appalled to see that so many bros still support these men who have sex with a young girl, just wondering if you all have any children? :( if anyone of u have children and still support them, really shame on you.

[peanut123]

i am really appalled to see that so many bros still support these men who have sex with a young girl, just wondering if you all have any children? :( if anyone of u have children and still support them, really shame on you.

Personally, I think as long as she's above the age of consent, it is fine. It's not as if those men are pedophiles going for small girls. She's well above the age of consent.

[Golden question]

i am really appalled to see that so many bros still support these men who have sex with a young girl, just wondering if you all have any children? :( if anyone of u have children and still support them, really shame on you.

If those guy knew she is under 18,they might think twice.But if the girl knew what she is doing and want fast and good money by doing this trade and not telling her client that she is under 18,then she is wrong.

Is the same as a HIV person know he have HIV but did not tell his sex partner.Is consider he have break the law but how about a 17 year old girl who was protected according to the law who did not tell her client,she is under age?

As what some bro say,after 10 plus years of singapore education and 17 years old,she cannot make a judgement on what is right and what is wrong.She even keep track can even note down the day,time and location the deal is been done.As what that lawyer say,she is a hardcord prostitute who know what she is doing.

It can happen to any bro but those guys is suay to get caught so is also a good lesson to us to learn.I do admire that ex principal who admit that he is wrong and dont hide his face when going into court.He have the guts to admit he is wrong and everybody make mistake and is not as though he commit a rape scene.He want the case to be close fast and move on in order not to make his family suffer as he already shame them.

[asdfghjkl]

in a way, i think the principal suffered more than a rapist in singapore. so many info have been digged out on him and his face continues to be on front page. after 9 weeks, he may have to leave this country to start all over again with a criminal record.

his marital status? nobody knows if his wife has really forgaven him or its all just a headfake ploy to lighten his sentence. as a woman myself, i would be doubtful if the girl is the only FL he had engaged.

[naturegreen]

.........

I have to agree with what you say but now Mr Lee is condemned......

[JRthe6]

Bro oral sex had been legalized now

Oral sex must be followed by penetration. Just oral sex alone is still illegal.

JR the 6th

[JRthe6]

Mate ..In your opinion.. what is your acceptable age for a gal to engage in sexual activities.??

maybe u should write to the sg government and suggest to
Them to increase the legal age for gals to engage in sexual activities.
afterall they were the ones who thinks 18 is ok. If we go by your argument then perhaps the PAP should be ashame of themselves for letting such a law pass thru...

Matter of fact is there are load of countries beside sg who thinks 18 years old is the acceptable age for a gal to have sex..

PAP had to follow the UN Human Rights Protocol Convention on the Rights of Children as they were a signatory to it. The other load of countries are in the same position as the PAP as more than 100 countries had signed the Protocol. What is the UNHRCRC? Read on.....

Singapore is a signatory to the United Nations Human Rights Protocol to the Convention of the Rights of the Child (UNHRCRC) on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. Currently more than 100 countries are signatories to the Protocol.

As a signatory, Singapore is obliged to observe and position its laws in line with that of the protocol.

The UNHRCRC first came into force in 2002 but that originally did not have the below 18 section. Because of allegations that surfaced in 2005 that UN peacekeepers deployed around the world were engaging child prostitutes, UN Sec-Gen Kofi Annan directed a team of experts led by UN Asst Sec-Gen Adeline Kane to do a redraft of the original and thus the amended Protocol to the UNHRCRC now has included in it a section that prohibits sexual activities with persons under 18, for the exchange of money, goods or services for sexual favours. This new protocol came into force sometime in either 2009 or 2010. Singapore became a signatory to this new amended protocol. (So if these 48 men had screwed "Chantelle" in 2008/2009 they would not have broken the law).

This does not apply only in Singapore but in all the other 100+ countries that were signatories to the UNHRCRC.

JR the 6th

[JRthe6]

Unfortunately I don't think this is the case. Your job does influence the outcome. I think the senior police officer will get the worst sentence. He clearly knows the law and he broke it.

Maybe thats why he changed his name. I understand he was an investigator previously who had sent people into jail. Wonder how is he going to face these same people that he convicted?

JR the 6th

[JRthe6]

I don't think this is a leak. The intel of men-in-blue (MIB) is very strong.

Very true. You'll be surprised at the number of paid informers under their registers. Add to that number of those other informal / volunteers / part-timer informants and it seems like every 3 persons, 1 is an informer based on a population of 4.5 million.


Regarding why the clamp down is only happening recently..

Because of the number of high profile men in this case, they have to proceed with extra caution in their investigations and I understand that directions on the case came from the PMO's . Dir/CID Hoong WT was often seen in the company of a Minister (ex-police) from the PMO during this investigative period. I assume the reason was because of this case...... I could be wrong here.

JR the 6th

[JRthe6]

i take it he made what seems to be a rational decision then, bonk a young FL that looks like one of the chio bu in his school. better than molesting one of the 2000. i dun look down on him.

His school is a primary school.
I don't think any of his students look anything like "Chantelle" as they would only be just reaching puberty.

JR the 6th

[JRthe6]

Prosecutor asked for 3 month (12 week sentence). Judge gave 9 weeks. With 1/3 remission, he will be out in 6 weeks. I wonder if he can spend the last 4 weeks under Home Detention where he wears a tag on his ankle. Glad his wife forgave him and renewed their vows. Important he has support behind him now.

I think he was a secondary school principal? If he is, then despite being a principal of a school of teenagers, he wasn't able to differentiate between a 17 and 19 year old. What are the chances that the rest of the 47 guys will suspect the girl is underage?

I believe 9 weeks is not eligible for 1/3 remission. Previously only sentences above 3 months are eligible, has it been changed now?


He was a primary school principal so I would hardly say he is experienced in differentiating between 17 and 19 year olds. Based on the pics that were posted online, most people would be unable to tell that Chantelle was below 18. I did a test by showing her pic (minus headshot) to several female colleagues and during church service and asking them to guess her age. Only 1 replied below 18 but she has been surfing SBF so she already knew, but none of the others were able to guess correctly and none of them belived that was the body of a 17 year old.


JR the 6th

[JRthe6]

she was 17 at that time. for this case, one might argue if he have sex with her as her BFF.. no offense under the law.. :o

Reread the law carefully, (..... sexual activities with persons under 18, for the exchange of money, goods or services for sexual favours).

If your so-called 17 yr old GF turns around later and lodges a report that you bought her a Gucci bag so she would have sex with you....... what would that be? :rolleyes:


JR the 6th

[JRthe6]

Too bad the girl goes off scot free.

The saga is not finished yet. They cannot be harsh on the girl as she may be needed as a prosecution witness in case the men claimed the sex acts did not take place. I understand her statements were detrimental to the men. A friend attached to the CID/SIS mentioned she has been placed on a Witness Protection Scheme.

JR the 6th

[asdfghjkl]

If your so-called 17 yr old GF turns around later and lodges a report that you bought her a Gucci bag so she would have sex with you....... what would that be?

that would not stand in the court and there is a reason for it. can you cite such a case that happened in the way you described before? :eek:

[breitlingbrat]

Gal who cheated her age to sell her body=not guilty
OKT who sell underage gal=not guilty
Guy who shag a gal who did not declare her age as she is underage=guilty?

[FirstTimeUser]

Gal who cheated her age to sell her body=not guilty
OKT who sell underage gal=not guilty
Guy who shag a gal who did not declare her age as she is underage=guilty?

OKT who sell underage gal = guilty, definitely wont be not guilty. His name is splashed all over the papers too, isnt it?

[breitlingbrat]

oh, didn't follow up much on the news. they should put jail time to that whore too!

[sgjoey]

oh, didn't follow up much on the news. they should put jail time to that whore too!

Of course not. What harm has the girl actually done the men? It's the stupid law that is at fault, not the girl.

Neither the men nor the girl deserve to be punished. If the law is broken, the one who should be punished is the pimp, because it is his duty to check the age of the girl and verify that she is above 18 before offering her in his website.

The law itself should be repealed.

[2centsworth]

There is a poll on Channelnewasia and the question is Should prostitutes who misrepresent their age be held responsible? Please visit http://www.channelnewsasia.com/tp/ to cast your vote. So far, 88% of votes say prostitutes who misrepresent their age should be held responsible.

[sgjoey]

There is a poll on Channelnewasia and the question is Should prostitutes who misrepresent their age be held responsible? Please visit http://www.channelnewsasia.com/tp/ to cast your vote. So far, 88% of votes say prostitutes who misrepresent their age should be held responsible.

Unfortunately, that majority vote is an uninformed vote. So long as the law remains as it is, anyone below 18 counts as a minor (in the context of that law) and is perceived (rightly or wrongly) to be a victim, not the perpetrator.

The law itself is meant to protect young people (mostly females) from becoming sex workers. The law therefore cannot be used to prosecute these people.

Essentially, the whole situation involves a willing buyer-willing seller transaction. There are actually no victims. By punishing the men, the men suddenly become victims. But they are not victimised by the sex worker. They are victimised by the law, and how this law is being interpreted by our judges.

At most the men should be quietly fined and released. Instead, their cases have been sensationalised and their lives have turned topsyturvy. This is a tragedy in the making.

[JRthe6]

At most the men should be quietly fined and released. Instead, their cases have been sensationalised and their lives have turned topsyturvy. This is a tragedy in the making.

I hope they are mentally strong enough to take the punishment and move on with their lives. It would indeed be a tragedy if anyone of these 80 men breaks down and perform an "Ong Kah Chua" action plan on the judiciary / lawmakers.

[asdfghjkl]

whats Ong Kah Chua, a VIP? :o

[JRthe6]

whats Ong Kah Chua, a VIP? :o

You have never heard of Ong Kah Chua? He is a National Hero of Singapore.
The first man who had the guts to attack an MP.

[Apocalypse]

You have never heard of Ong Kah Chua? He is a National Hero of Singapore.
The first man who had the guts to attack an MP.

he died already right?

[SinDellman]

actually bro Lee and those who are pleasing guilty without a trial are spoilers. they should have retained a good common lawyer and fight the case enbloc, and if possible, a common defense. them it would be a landmark case.

[AustinPowers]

You are not being logical. The respondents of the poll may be of the opinion that the law isn't fair and that it should hold the girl responsible. And you are saying they are uninformed? Nobody is saying that the girl should be held responsible under the existing laws.

You've be in this forum saying the obvious which almost everybody knows - like telling everybody that the sun rises in the east.




Unfortunately, that majority vote is an uninformed vote. So long as the law remains as it is, anyone below 18 counts as a minor (in the context of that law) and is perceived (rightly or wrongly) to be a victim, not the perpetrator.

The law itself is meant to protect young people (mostly females) from becoming sex workers. The law therefore cannot be used to prosecute these people..

[sgjoey]

You are not being logical. The respondents of the poll may be of the opinion that the law isn't fair and that it should hold the girl responsible. And you are saying they are uninformed? Nobody is saying that the girl should be held responsible under the existing laws.

You've be in this forum saying the obvious which almost everybody knows - like telling everybody that the sun rises in the east.

It's uninformed because the public does not seem to understand that the hands of the judges are tied. They have to take the law as it is. And therefore the sex worker cannot be persecuted.

The stance of the law is in accordance with international standards. So to claim that the law is unfair because it does not go after the sex worker is to be behind the times. Our minors need protection. That line has been drawn, in the context of the law, at 18.

What CAN be done, which our judges so far refuse to do, is to fine the men instead of imprisoning them. They may have no choice regarding the verdict, but they do have the choice when it comes to the sentencing. This is where the public outcry should be directed.

There is no point trying to hold the sex worker responsible because she is regarded as a minor.

Of course, the public may also ask the law to be repealed. But this takes a long time, and it is the fate of the 48 men which should be immediately addressed.

[FirstTimeUser]

It's uninformed because the public does not seem to understand that the hands of the judges are tied. They have to take the law as it is. And therefore the sex worker cannot be persecuted.

...

What CAN be done, which our judges so far refuse to do, is to fine the men instead of imprisoning them. They may have no choice regarding the verdict, but they do have the choice when it comes to the sentencing. This is where the public outcry should be directed.

...

Of course, the public may also ask the law to be repealed. But this takes a long time, and it is the fate of the 48 men which should be immediately addressed.

I agree that the judges have to base their judgment on the relevant statues. I think the judges set to rule on the cases now have their hands tied to hand down jail sentences. All previous cases were met with jail terms. Using the previous rationale and judgment handed down, I think they do not have the choice of handing down fines only. Unless someone appeals to a higher court which overturns the previous decisions, jail sentences are likely. Blame the first judge who did not exercise leniency in light of such mitigating circumstances?

And yes, I definitely agree the law should be reviewed to allow for mitigating circumstances to be used as a defense rather than just a mitigating factor in sentencing. But it is unlikely it will have any impact on the men charged in this case as law changes tend not to be retrospective.

[peanut123]

Actually, the poll is just asking for the public's opinion, not how the current cases should be judged. The poll question is "Should prostitutes who misrepresent their age be held accountable?", not "Should this underage prostitute be held accountable?"

An opinion could be used as a factor should the law be reviewed in future, but it has no bearing on the current case.


It's uninformed because the public does not seem to understand that the hands of the judges are tied. They have to take the law as it is. And therefore the sex worker cannot be persecuted.
... the rest of post deleted for brevity...

[slider_72]

What CAN be done, which our judges so far refuse to do, is to fine the men instead of imprisoning them. They may have no choice regarding the verdict, but they do have the choice when it comes to the sentencing. This is where the public outcry should be directed.


Actually, what can be done and should have been done was for the Attorney General to exercise their prosecutorial discretion not to charge the 48 men.

It is up to the Attorney General to decide whether or not to charge them. If the evidence is clear that these 48 men were misled by the hooker and the pimp, frankly I don't see the rationale for pursuing this case further. The law was enacted to protect minors. In this case, the hooker was a hard core hooker. It was not as if she was trafficked from some other third world country and forced into prostitution.

Once they are charged, the judge has no choice but to convict them because an offense has been committed.

Can't really blame the judge either because previous cases also involved custodial sentences. It would take a really brave judge to impose a fine only.

To me, the one who really caused this case to escalate to such a mammoth proportion was the Attorney General.

[AustinPowers]

The public may be smarter than you think. Have you ever considered that most of the respondents of the survey could be saying that the law is not fair, and should be made fairer for the girl to be held accountable?

You keep repeating the law here and how our minors need protection, and the age 18 --- these everybody already knows -- including most of the respondents of the poll --- most of them know that the judges do not make the laws (parliament passes the laws) and that judges rule according to the laws.

Many people are not as clueless as you think, so there is no need for you to go around to educate others on this law. People here are questioning the fairness of this law. They want to repeal or at least modify the law - as citizens, they can petition their MPs to raise a motion in parliament to amend the law -- but this is something which will never happen here.



It's uninformed because the public does not seem to understand that the hands of the judges are tied. They have to take the law as it is. And therefore the sex worker cannot be persecuted.

The stance of the law is in accordance with international standards. So to claim that the law is unfair because it does not go after the sex worker is to be behind the times. Our minors need protection. That line has been drawn, in the context of the law, at 18.

What CAN be done, which our judges so far refuse to do, is to fine the men instead of imprisoning them. They may have no choice regarding the verdict, but they do have the choice when it comes to the sentencing. This is where the public outcry should be directed.

There is no point trying to hold the sex worker responsible because she is regarded as a minor.

Of course, the public may also ask the law to be repealed. But this takes a long time, and it is the fate of the 48 men which should be immediately addressed.

[justdesert]

Actually, the poll is just asking for the public's opinion, not how the current cases should be judged. The poll question is "Should prostitutes who misrepresent their age be held accountable?", not "Should this underage prostitute be held accountable?"

An opinion could be used as a factor should the law be reviewed in future, but it has no bearing on the current case.

Talking Point should change the main topic and poll.

Should be,

Should the Singapore Press give such a hugh coverage to this case and hunt the 'accused' like dogs?

[Stud00]

next time, before doing the deed,

Ask for ic, or passport. compare photograph.. be more kiasu, snap a picture of it with ur phone.. if ok, then bonk, if not, throw smoke and get the hell outta the room.

Sigh... am amazed with the way our garmen handles issues... oh what happened to the SCDF chief? no sound, no music? :))

[terrible ted]

It is a blardy big joke.

Can anyone tell me, what is the difference between a 17 year old pussy and 18 year old pussy? Pussy is unique what. Even test also dont know how old.

A 60 year old virgin pussy can feel like a 17 year old pussy if figuratively speaking.

[2centsworth]

Unfortunately, that majority vote is an uninformed vote. So long as the law remains as it is, anyone below 18 counts as a minor (in the context of that law) and is perceived (rightly or wrongly) to be a victim, not the perpetrator.

The law itself is meant to protect young people (mostly females) from becoming sex workers. The law therefore cannot be used to prosecute these people.

The vote could be the start for a review. I pity us guys in Singapore. We have no groups to lobby for our rights. Feminist groups on the other hand kept lobbying our governments for laws that are harsh on guys. I remember reading a feminist comment (think from some UN group) that charging the 48 men shows that the government is serious about protecting minors. Only a brainless idiot will use this case to justify why the age limit is 18. She should have used other cases where the underage lady didn't systematically lie.

Can anyone tell me, what is the difference between a 17 year old pussy and 18 year old pussy? Pussy is unique what. Even test also dont know how old.

The legal age for alcohol in Singapore is 18. You can pour a glass of champagne over the pussy of a 18 year old for foreplay and slurp it out but you can't do so if she's only 17. Just talking rubbish. :p

[2centsworth]

next time, before doing the deed,

Ask for ic, or passport. compare photograph.. be more kiasu, snap a picture of it with ur phone.. if ok, then bonk, if not, throw smoke and get the hell outta the room.

I got a better idea. You walk into any police station or NPP and ask the police officer in charge if he can verify the girl is above 18. Prostitution isn't illegal right? You won't get into trouble for asking. :p

[justdesert]

I got a better idea. You walk into any police station or NPP and ask the police officer in charge if he can verify the girl is above 18. Prostitution isn't illegal right? You won't get into trouble for asking. :p

No,better still,call police come your hotel room and verify her I.C on spot,pass than just goes on with it.Save the trip.:D

[callmebad]

just can't help feeling Singapore is a society that is very anti-male

men are always been looked upon as the bad ones
women are the weaker ones, they are vulnerable, they should be protected

maybe this view applies in ancient time, but this is no longer truth in this Internet age

this kind of under-age prostitution law is just another add-on to the Women Charter Law to punish men heavily at the slightest offense

my strong belief is in this case,the girl doesn't deserve any form of protection:mad:

[sgjoey]

The legal age for alcohol in Singapore is 18. You can pour a glass of champagne over the pussy of a 18 year old for foreplay and slurp it out but you can't do so if she's only 17. Just talking rubbish. :p

The line has to be drawn somewhere. Wherever it is drawn, there are bound to be cases where the sex worker is just slightly to the left of the line.

The injustice in these cases is not where the line is drawn, but that the men were misled into thinking that the girl was above 18 when she wasn't, and, going by past cases, the judges in Singapore feel that this is still not a good enough reason for an acquittal, or even just a fine but no jail.

There is the law, and there is interpretation of the law. I think our judges have erred in their judgments concerning such cases in the past, and may therefore be constrained to continue to err in the present and future.

What's really needed is a Justice Pao with the wisdom to put things right.

[sgjoey]

Actually, what can be done and should have been done was for the Attorney General to exercise their prosecutorial discretion not to charge the 48 men.

It is up to the Attorney General to decide whether or not to charge them. If the evidence is clear that these 48 men were misled by the hooker and the pimp, frankly I don't see the rationale for pursuing this case further. The law was enacted to protect minors. In this case, the hooker was a hard core hooker. It was not as if she was trafficked from some other third world country and forced into prostitution.

Once they are charged, the judge has no choice but to convict them because an offense has been committed.

Can't really blame the judge either because previous cases also involved custodial sentences. It would take a really brave judge to impose a fine only.

To me, the one who really caused this case to escalate to such a mammoth proportion was the Attorney General.

I agree. The AG should not have charged the men in the first place. But he may in turn be also constrained by the fact that in the past, similar offences were brought to trial. Not to charge the men now would seem to be inconsistent.

But now that the men have been charged, the judges should take the opportunity to set a new legal precedent. This will partly depend on what rabbits the defence manage to pull out of their hats -- whether their arguments will contain something that will convince the judges to behave differently from the past.

[wallace741852]

Hmmm i wonder how Mr Teo feels when be bump into them in CP?
Honestly Mr Teo should be locked up for a long time... He seriously ruin a lot of families, life, careers.... A good example of rich man with no morales.

[flamboyant]

I agree. The AG should not have charged the men in the first place. But he may in turn be also constrained by the fact that in the past, similar offences were brought to trial. Not to charge the men now would seem to be inconsistent.

But now that the men have been charged, the judges should take the opportunity to set a new legal precedent. This will partly depend on what rabbits the defence manage to pull out of their hats -- whether their arguments will contain something that will convince the judges to behave differently from the past.

Although the Attorney General is bestowed with the discretion to prosecute or not to prosecute this discretion is not unfettered. In cases such as these public policy requires auch offenders to be brought to justice. It's is true that the hands of the judges are tied. They cannot depart from the decisions of their predecessors. So it is for Parliament to now amend the law such as including a proviso to the section. Another way to mitigate the harshness is for an appeal to be made to the High Court. The High Court would have the power to depart from the previous decision and clarify the sentencing guidelines.

[plmnc]

The AG can choose not to charge the men. But will they?

This sex scandal is just a major diversion to all the "happenings" around SG which P*P is trying to turn our attention from.

These men are just unlucky. Sigh.:mad:

[sgjoey]

The AG can choose not to charge the men. But will they?

This sex scandal is just a major diversion to all the "happenings" around SG which P*P is trying to turn our attention from.

These men are just unlucky. Sigh.:mad:

Bro.... the men have ALREADY been charged!

[GowHowSeow]

Lucky..i didn't kena

[too_hot]

i am really appalled to see that so many bros still support these men who have sex with a young girl, just wondering if you all have any children? :( if anyone of u have children and still support them, really shame on you.

There is a reason that these men are getting our support (not to mention that of an MP). These men did NOT rape, seduce, sexually groom, intimidate or coerce that underage pros into sex.

She *chose* to be in this line of her own volition, she knew what she was doing, she wanted to make fast bucks, lied about her age and the men did not *knowingly* or *intentionally* break any law (or at least this particular under which they are being charged).

I am not saying the men should be let off scot-free. But the way which they are being portrayed is not right. She is as guilty, if not more, then them.

And no, i wouldn't mind sending my daughter to Mr. Lee's school.

[shctaw]

It is time to set a new law to catch OKT serving up underage ladies.

Penalty: 1 cane to OKT's dick will be enough. No need jail term.

[ricrain29]

The media exposure that all the men get is already enough to "kill" them, imagine the trouble!! imagine the shame!! and now jail term, well this is really overkill. A fine would have been enough IMHO.....nevertheless a toast to all my fallen brothers..... being shamed and jailed for some 'crime' they never intend to commit is really sad.....

[nasibriyani]

Suay but didnt take enough precaution. Surely as a principal or an educator in the field for a long time, he should more or less know the risk... Unfortunately but I understand where the law is coming from but in this case, felt that its been blown too big. Just gotta hate the media for covering such rubbish!

[miniboy]

these men who were charged, sworn to defend the constitutions of the republic of SG during their ns service

[Spytheman]

well . politics - who know who are the remaining guys .. maybe the new law we protested here can hide their idenitiies... hahahaha.. backfire on us.. the remaining are quite interesting leh

[joker88]

It is time to set a new law to catch OKT serving up underage ladies.

Penalty: 1 cane to OKT's dick will be enough. No need jail term.

Wah bro, that's a good one. :D

You sure want him to be punished jialat jialat huh? :D:)

[IceRed]

what happened to that OKT?

would be quite interesting if he is in the same jail as the 48 others he sabo.

[AmericanExpress]

bro lee. fallen but not forgotten.

[HornyTonyLIM]

what a waste of social talent...one hard cord hooker brings down 40 plus

[semreh]

what happened to that OKT?

would be quite interesting if he is in the same jail as the 48 others he sabo.

His case is pending. Why won't they prosecute him ahead of the men?

[pussylicious12345]

I am not taking sides, but i doubt these 48 men would be willing to pay such premium prices, if this is just another ordinary whore. They are paying more than 10 times for this underaged whore, as compared to a $50 chicken at geylang. And I don't think these 48 men are completely ignorant of market rates for whores; they are probably seasoned players. I suspect many of them went in with their eyes opened, and they think they are paying premium prices for a young, juicy abalone..... Probably a good deal in their opinion, until they were caught.

This is just my personal view...

[wallace741852]

Dude had you ever screw a premium FL?
Go FL Dome 3 to take a lot, there are still $800/1/1 around. And fyi, you may think 800 is too much to pay for pussy, but to others its just a small change... You know what i mean? Just imagine this scene that you are screwing a FL, will you demand her IC? Will she even give you? She will think u are from anti vice and run away.

Btw there is a lawyer among those being charge... You think a lawyer with a good career will go in with his eyes opened knowing that the stake is so high that it will ruin his career, his life, his family??

Think again dude...

I am not taking sides, but i doubt these 48 men would be willing to pay such premium prices, if this is just another ordinary whore. They are paying more than 10 times for this underaged whore, as compared to a $50 chicken at geylang. And I don't think these 48 men are completely ignorant of market rates for whores; they are probably seasoned players. I suspect many of them went in with their eyes opened, and they think they are paying premium prices for a young, juicy abalone..... Probably a good deal in their opinion, until they were caught.

This is just my personal view...

[FirstTimeUser]

Dude had you ever screw a premium FL?
Go FL Dome 3 to take a lot, there are still $800/1/1 around. And fyi, you may think 800 is too much to pay for pussy, but to others its just a small change... You know what i mean? Just imagine this scene that you are screwing a FL, will you demand her IC? Will she even give you? She will think u are from anti vice and run away.

Btw there is a lawyer among those being charge... You think a lawyer with a good career will go in with his eyes opened knowing that the stake is so high that it will ruin his career, his life, his family??

Think again dude...

I agree with your views regarding the premium FL, but I think if there is a lawyer (or a policeman for that matter) among those being charged, I think he has no excuse. He should know the law better and the presumptions that the law holds against men in such cases. I wont say he went in with his eyes open, but that he should know how harsh the law is on this issue and took necessary precautions to verify the age of the girl.

[peanut123]

There are many reasons why a guy would pay high prices for a hooker if he can afford it :

1. Exclusivity
2. The thought that premium prices comes with premium looks and services
3. The thought that she will be safer.
4. High end OKTs should look after their customers better.

Unfortunately, not all of the above were true, and that's why they are facing criminal charges.


I am not taking sides, but i doubt these 48 men would be willing to pay such premium prices, if this is just another ordinary whore. They are paying more than 10 times for this underaged whore, as compared to a $50 chicken at geylang. And I don't think these 48 men are completely ignorant of market rates for whores; they are probably seasoned players. I suspect many of them went in with their eyes opened, and they think they are paying premium prices for a young, juicy abalone..... Probably a good deal in their opinion, until they were caught.

This is just my personal view...

[asdfghjkl]

very true, you have just proved the following relationship

good price =/= good products

[Aniuge]

Originally Posted by t4buzhsy View Post
I am not taking sides, but i doubt these 48 men would be willing to pay such premium prices, if this is just another ordinary whore. They are paying more than 10 times for this underaged whore, as compared to a $50 chicken at geylang. And I don't think these 48 men are completely ignorant of market rates for whores; they are probably seasoned players. I suspect many of them went in with their eyes opened, and they think they are paying premium prices for a young, juicy abalone..... Probably a good deal in their opinion, until they were caught.

This is just my personal view...

Imho, these 48 bros went in with their eyes wide open. The problem was that their little head overruled their big ones. I guess I'd behave like them if I were put into the same situation.:p:D

[wuming43]

Nope. Going by precedents, the sentences range from a couple of months to about nine months. So he got off relatively lightly, but not as light as all that.

Though the maximum sentence is stated as 7 years, that is not meted out unless there are extraordinary circumstances such as the use of violence etc. The man was not charged for statutory rape, for goodness sake. That only applies if the girl is under 16. He was charged under Section 376B -- having sex with an underaged sex worker.

Any jail time is in fact already manifestly excessive. Because the judge has the option of just ordering a fine.

I am still nonpulussed how a man can be jailed when there was no intent to commit anything, though the law was undoubtedly broken.

In any case, that law itself is of questionable merit.

Good analysis bro. True there was no motive to commit crime, but unknowingly commited cause by victim and kana red handed with records.

[HornyTonyLIM]

Imho, these 48 bros went in with their eyes wide open. The problem was that their little head overruled their big ones. I guess I'd behave like them if I were put into the same situation.:p:D

Well, said bro...it could easily happen to anyone.

[sgjoey]

Imho, these 48 bros went in with their eyes wide open. The problem was that their little head overruled their big ones. I guess I'd behave like them if I were put into the same situation.:p:D

No... Rather than eyes wide open, I would say that they went in with their eyes wide shut!

Yes.... it could happen to anyone who seeks solace in the arms of sex workers.

[passi0n]

Ex-school principal released from jail (http://sg.news.yahoo.com/-ex-school-principal-released-from-jail.html)

Former school principal Lee Lip Hong was released from Changi Prison on Friday morning after six weeks in jail.

The 39-year-old former principal of Pei Chun Public School was sentenced to nine weeks’ jail for paying for sex with an under-aged girl in April, but was released early on grounds of good behaviour.

Lee was the first of 48 men to be charged in April for being part of a major police probe into an online prostitution ring.

The ex-principal admitted to two charges of having paid S$500 on each of two occasions for sex with a girl under 18 at Hotel 81 Bencoolen in September and December 2010.

Lee, who was a free thinker, turned to Christianity and inspirational books while in prison, reported The Straits Times.

He also told Channel News Asia he will focus on his family and work on getting their forgiveness.

"I think the important thing is to have the courage to face up the consequences. And then move on from there.. there is nothing in stopping me to make further contributions to the community or to the society, as long as I have the determination to do so," he said.

[sun814]

haha, ya, this bxxtxxd is out of jail already, should give him much heavier sentence, will never forgive him for having sex with an underage girl. it is not an issue of whether he is a principal or whether she is a pro, the real issue is she is just 17.

[tomcat007]

haha, ya, this bxxtxxd is out of jail already, should give him much heavier sentence, will never forgive him for having sex with an underage girl. it is not an issue of whether he is a principal or whether she is a pro, the real issue is she is just 17.

Does he know she is underage?

Let the one who has not committed a sin cast the first stone.

[Deesiaokia]

Lol.. My friend were actually in the same cluster as the principle.. He was released 2 weeks before him.. According to him, this principle very quiet wan and always in his own world, I tease my friend that did he go n make friend with him..he is tall n full of hairs ( from chest all the way down) ... Sibei man is what my friend said about him... Think he really learn his lesson Liao.. Good luck to those commandos that are fighting this case..:D

[sgjoey]

haha, ya, this bxxtxxd is out of jail already, should give him much heavier sentence, will never forgive him for having sex with an underage girl. it is not an issue of whether he is a principal or whether she is a pro, the real issue is she is just 17.

This is silly. Who are you to forgive or not to forgive him? Are you aware that the law that convicted him is less than five years old? Are you aware of the (international) politics behind the law?

[sun814]

This is silly. Who are you to forgive or not to forgive him? Are you aware that the law that convicted him is less than five years old? Are you aware of the (international) politics behind the law?

haha, you must be someone who won't give a damn about the girl's age when it comes to getting a sexual gratification, this guy is nothing less than a paedophile in my eyes. as if you know about international politics :rolleyes:

[sun814]

haha, i m bemused by some of the remarks i hear from the streets with regards to two cases, the first being this case and the second being the one involving the former SCDF chief, i can hear nuch more condemnation for the SCDF chief, and more sympathy for this case. there are people who questions why those men are hounded by the media, but nobody questions why not for this SCDF chief case. there are people who questions why the underage pro identity is not expose, but not these 3 women when their names are highlighted big times in the papers. see the differences in treatments?

[anton]

Y'day, four more admitted guilt. One of the four is Lee Lip Kian, 33.
Brother of Lee Lip Hong, 39?

[Bebeque]

haha, i m bemused by some of the remarks i hear from the streets with regards to two cases, the first being this case and the second being the one involving the former SCDF chief, i can hear nuch more condemnation for the SCDF chief, and more sympathy for this case. there are people who questions why those men are hounded by the media, but nobody questions why not for this SCDF chief case. there are people who questions why the underage pro identity is not expose, but not these 3 women when their names are highlighted big times in the papers. see the differences in treatments?

Anyone who is in the know about reasons for the differences in treatment tell leh.

Camping here.

[Bielsa]

Anyone who is in the know about reasons for the differences in treatment tell leh.

Camping here.

I read in the other sister forum that it involves a GLC that expected the contracts to be awarded to them as their CEO was politically connected and one of the most powerful woman in the world. They must have been angry to lose to these 3 women companies so it is revenge time.

[adultentertain]

haha, you must be someone who won't give a damn about the girl's age when it comes to getting a sexual gratification, this guy is nothing less than a paedophile in my eyes. as if you know about international politics :rolleyes:
What Brother Lee Lip Hong "RIP"
He is alive & kicking. He is back with the Singapore Women's volleyball team in this SEA Game. Really got very good connection.