When Laws Miss The Point: Female Teacher Jailed 10 Months For Teen Sex

************************************************

SINGAPORE: A female teacher in Singapore who had sex with a 15-year-old student was jailed for 10 months Monday, a court spokesman said.

The woman's identity has been withheld to protect the victim, said the spokesman, who confirmed that District Judge Sarjit Singh handed down the sentence, but gave no further details.

Now unemployed, the 32-year-old woman earlier pleaded guilty to having sex with a minor under the age of 16. 

The friendship between the teacher and boy began when he was a 14-year-old Grade Six pupil and joined an overseas school trip which she led, a report said. 

They later had sex, when he was 15, after the boy said he loved the woman who had declared him her godson, it said. By then, the boy had moved on to a secondary school. 

They had sex five more times but when she tried to end the affair the boy threatened to kill her, leading her to contact police, the report continued. 

The report added that Judge Singh said the case involved a serious breach of trust.

The woman could have been jailed for up to 10 years and fined.

She wept as she was led away to serve her sentence, 938Live radio reported.

***********************************************

Source: Yahoo Singapore

Now, before I say anything, I'd like to clarify that both of them were a bit koo koo (bonkers) for even having a relationship like this. I know single adults in Singapore have a serious problem finding loved ones nowadays (I'll write about this some other time), but this is a bit extreme.

However, wasn't the sentence passed by the judge flawed in this context? Doesn't it seem unjust for the woman? Here are my viewpoints on the matter.

1. I know the woman had sexual relations with the boy. But is that "Rape" in Statutory Rape? The boy gave his consent. He told her he loved her. And don't give me the argument that the boy didn't know what he was doing. Please, at that time, he was 14, not 5 years old. Hormones may be influencing him, but he was already rational at that time.  

The woman must have been sick, but to punish her for "rape" seems off. She didn't force him to have sex. It just happened that the person she had sex with was not of "legal age". If she was below legal age, she wouldn't be charged with this "crime". 

It seems like the law was enacted for the sake of ONLY following the law, and not to uphold the values it's trying to protect. She gets jailed because of a legality, and not really a corruption of moral values they've put in place. 

2. Why wasn't the boy punished? He threatened to kill the woman! That was the reason why she went to the authorities in the first place. The boy was the one who had evil thoughts and had the intention of committing a crime. Why he gets to roam free I will never know. 

Laws are made to uphold the values that we've all agreed that we should live by to have peace and order in society. Laws are made by the people for the people, and so the law has to be always put into context in any given situation. Otherwise, it becomes too rigid and won't make sense, like the case of the woman.

In the end, I end with a learning I've heard long ago. Laws are made by the people, for the people. We should live by the laws we've put in place, but we also have to be ready to change / mold them when they deem not applicable anymore.

layman

Social Insensitivity: Waiter Returns $45,000 Ring, is Rewarded

***************************************************************************************************************

Waiter returns $45,000 ring, is rewarded.

His salary may be less than minimum wage, but it doesn't stop him from turning over a diamond ring worth P2 million ($45,000). 

For his good deed, resort worker Rodolfo Niere yesterday received a cash reward of P10,000 ($216) and a citation from Cebu Gov. Gwendolyn Garcia "for exemplary character of honesty".

Niere, 20, was recognized for returning a diamond ring worth $45,000 (P2,070,000 at an exchange rate of P46 to a dollar) that a balikbayan (overseas Filipino) left in their resort during the Suroy Suroy sa Sugbu southern heritage last week...

...Although he was only receiving P2000 a month, he always makes sure that he will not make a mistake before he needed the job...

***************************************************************************************************************

From the Philippine Daily Inquirer. Full article can be read here.

As "feel-good" as this article's supposed to be, this article just pissed the hell out of me for a number of reasons. Just to clarify why I'm very angry, it's not because of the waiter who returned the ring. I am very proud of him for doing such a feat. I'm pissed at whoever wrote this, as well as the person who lost the $45,000 ring.

1. The author of this article assumes that JUST BECAUSE THE GUY WAS POOR, HIS FEAT WAS MORE REMARKABLE. He may not be aware of it, but what he just did was look down on those who have low income, assuming that the moment there are opportunities for them to have easy money, they take the easy way out by committing crimes. 

For one, being poor does NOT mean a person would easily succumb to crime or evil acts! It's is not the social status or income levels that define whether or not a person will commit crimes, but the values they grow up in! There are countries that have high levels of poverty but relatively low crime rates (source). True, I do agree that there are positive correlations between the two in most places (perhaps even causal), but it's NOT because of JUST BEING POOR! It's due to the social pressures being forced upon them (unjust laws, abuse by the rich, cycles of poverty created by unjust political and social systems, etc.).

The author may not have explicitly discriminated the poor, but that actually makes it worse because he sends a subtle message to those who read this. He's planted a seed of misguided awe into his readers' minds, thinking that the man was a good man for being honest IN SPITE of being poor, and that the rest of them are lying, cheating scumbags. 

This kind of story is one of the reasons why the country is so divided, and it pisses the hell out of me because it's very insensitive to the real plights of those who need our help.  

2. Another reason why I'm pissed is because of the balikbayan (an Overseas Filipino Worker who came back to the Philippines for a holiday / etc.) and her insensitivity to the plights of the people she used to live with. What a very hedonistic purchase! $45,000 for a fucking diamond ring! That amount of money may have helped A LOT of people, the vast majority living on less than $1 A DAY! And the worst part is, she almost lost it, meaning she didn't pay too much attention to it because she was taking the luxury for granted. 

It makes me very angry because here I am, struggling to work alone in a foreign land to put myself in a position in the future where I'll have power or influence to help a lot of people, and the people who are already in those positions I desperately want to be in are just wasting away their power and influence indulging in very selfish acts such as buying expensive rocks that hardly mean anything to them.

I'm not saying we shouldn't indulge in a bit of luxury. But for someone who has grown up seeing poor people beg on the streets everyday, that purchase was just too selfish of her. 

So for all of those who're able to read this, please to do not be like these 2. Be careful of what you write, because you never know the subtle messages you bring about by what you say. And please do not overindulge in luxuries that you don't necessarily need. There are more people in need of any extra blessings you have, and it's more fulfilling to share them in hopes of uplifting the lives of those who need it most. 

layman