Case 1,2,3

I don't know much about the law. The only thing that comes to my mind is the case of an old bat finding a snail in her drink during Biz Law Lecture 1. With my limited knowledge, I have come to the conclusion that our judicial system is warped.

Now i'm not talking about expert knowledge and incomprehensible language that law makers use .. I'm just using common sense here. A number of recent cases that i've come across in the papers simply befuddle me.

Case 1: A mentally retarded young man had his sentence increased after an appeal.

Details: Boy had just been released from prison for molestation charges. Almost right away, he groped the breasts of some unlucky woman along the street. Hence he was shackled and cuffed once again and sent on a return trip to Changi. Boy's sentence was increased after an appeal.

Why it doesn't make sense: Note i use the word 'Boy', coz the young man's IQ is in the 50s range. A normal adult's IQ is around 90 to 110 while the average IQ of someone with Down Syndrome is 50. Obviously, this person's 'brain power' is way below normal and its apparent from the way he acted that packing him off to jail didn't work the 1st time, and chances of it working the 2nd time is close to NIL. He needs counselling and help, not the cane.

Which brings me to today's case.. A SERIAL molester who can obviously think and plot, had been sentenced to almost the same punishment as the retarded 'boy'! He wears a tee shirt around his head, grabs women from behind and MASTURBATES in front of his victims stark naked. And he did it 8 times over a period of 3 years. That's a very sick and very unrepentant pervert!

Case 2: Alaskan Malamute dies of heat stroke. Owner fined $3000.

Details: The dog died of heat stroke as a result of wilful neglect on its owner's part. He had been 'advised' by some animal protection group prior to his dog's death but did nothing to improve its living conditions.

Why it doesn't make sense: $3000 is nothing to someone who lives in Landed property and in the prime district of Bukit Timah at that. Probably even 30,000 would do little to discourage the owner from doing such a thing again. This kind of extreme cruelty ought to be punishable by a jail sentence. He put an arctic animal with 2 coats of fur under the tropical sun with NO WATER!Its akin to humans putting on two jackets and standing under the mid-day sun. Moreover, this dog was subject to such unbearable conditions over an extended period of time, not a day or two. It died a painful death with blood and foam oozing out of its mouth.

Case 3: Woman in coma after being hit by a reversing car is 50% at fault

Details: She was crossing the road when a car reversed and hit her. Judge ruled that she has to take half the blame coz she failed to keep a look out for traffic on the opposite side. Errant driver was fined $500 and given 6 demerit points.

Why it doesn't make sense: How often do you cross a road expecting vehicles to move AGAINST the traffic? The driver reversed a distance of not one or two, but 5 lots, in an area with many eateries and ought to have done it real slow and kept a look-out for other vehicles or pedestrians. Instead, he hit her with enough impact to knock her out permanently. If the same logic applies, then if killer-litter hits me, i have to share 50% of the blame coz i should have been more careful and checked 'upwards'? Now the woman's in a vegetative state, chalking up medical bills which her family has to pay and the driver got off with $500 fine? That's like being caught eating on an MRT..

I find the above judgements mind-boggling. Somehow, sentences metted out do not seem to reflect the seriousness of the crime in some cases, while for others, it seems overly harsh and senseless.