Man jailed for stealing S$30
-
He use Zippo lighter to whack the padlock?
-
Originally posted by mancha:
The thief is using sympathy to get off the hook.
He is 40 yo, and thinks it is ok to steal to feed his mother?
"Hey my mother is sick, so it is ok for me to rob you."
"You want to steal also can, but must have some one needy at home first."
Like.
-
stealing is stealing. Pls dun mix in politics.
It is not his first offence. Have you consider that the court took into account all his previous offences and that perhaps he had already been jailed for various durations already?
Stealing is a crime. It cannot be justified with reasons like his mother no food, if he dun steal, the mother would die. The law is written around (a bit) on rights of an individual or entity. No individual can steal your things. It is your right to own what you own and it is protected by the laws governing the consituation.
Besides, if he can steal, he can work. Even working at mac or working at hawker centre is also work. Stealing brings one down to the lowest being of man.
-
If it's so easy to find job, then there won't be this economic term called unemployment.
Killing deserves a death sentence, but there are circumstances where killing is pardoned by the law.
Surely stealing $30 to feed her handicapped mother is a justifiable crime.
Law is a concept of morality.
What morality can be espouse by the courts depriving a handicapped mom from her son?
What morality can be expounded to society by denying a handicapped mother to basic food?
Law is politics.
Serious.
How to break them into non-related entities?
I quote from Dworkin's Legal Positivism.
To identify the law of a given society we must engage in moral and political argument, for the law is whatever requirements are consistent with an interpretation of its legal practices (subject to a threshold condition of fit) that shows them to be best justified in light of the animating ideal.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/legal-positivism/
-
like les mis
-
even if it was greed or personal gain, the punishment is very severe.
a week or 2 weeks jail should be meted out. when you kill somebody in the road, sometimes that driver got off with a fine and a few years of banning from driving.
-
Mosque speaks up in S$32 theft case
SINGAPORE: A man, who was sentenced on Thursday to a year's jail for stealing S$32 from a mosque, had been helped by the same mosque for the last three years.
In a media statement to Channel NewsAsia, Darussalam Mosque said Noraizam Abdullah had been caught committing offences on several occasions since he sought refuge in the mosque in 2008.
The mosque heard that the 40-year-old man used to live with his sister but was asked to leave after a family dispute.
He then sought refuge at the mosque and was later offered a job there as an assistant caretaker.
However, he was caught threatening the mosque staff, hurling vulgarities and acting aggressively towards them.
In addition, he was also found asking the staff and members of his congregation for money.
Darussalam Mosque said Noraizam still continued with his mischief despite undergoing repeated counselling by staff.
The last straw was when he was caught stealing from a donation box.
The mosque said that a police report was made to protect the safety of its staff and congregants.
Noraizam had previously said in court that he stole money to feed his family, including his handicapped mother.
In response, the mosque said it is currently looking into this and would extend necessary assistance if needed.
- CNA/wk -
Originally posted by βÎτά:
If it's so easy to find job, then there won't be this economic term called unemployment.
Killing deserves a death sentence, but there are circumstances where killing is pardoned by the law.
Surely stealing $30 to feed her handicapped mother is a justifiable crime.
Law is a concept of morality.
What morality can be espouse by the courts depriving a handicapped mom from her son?
What morality can be expounded to society by denying a handicapped mother to basic food?
Law is politics.
Serious.
How to break them into non-related entities?
I quote from Dworkin's Legal Positivism.
To identify the law of a given society we must engage in moral and political argument, for the law is whatever requirements are consistent with an interpretation of its legal practices (subject to a threshold condition of fit) that shows them to be best justified in light of the animating ideal.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/legal-positivism/
法律�外人情.
$30 jailed a year.
$200 million only 25 yrs or thereabout?
-
When you steal, must steal big.
Pushiment still the same
-
why the judge warn him about corrective training? What is that anyway? Is it worse than jail time? 0.o
-
Corrective training for a 40yo with a history of offences.
More likely it is preventive detention with corrective training for habitual offender.