Wednesday, November 03, 2010

Shadrake Case : Real Test to be applied.

Read the breaking news from The Online Citizen[Link]

Several months I wrote that if the Inherent Tendency Test is applied in this case, the only way for Shadrake to win is to prove that he didn't write his book, Once A Jolly Hangman[Link].

The judge has ruled that the Real Test will be applied in this case i.e. Shadrake has a chance to win. The presecution needs to show there is "more than a remote possibility that a significant number of people who have read Shadrake’s book would believe his claims.” The defence will have a chance to show evidence for the statements made in the book.

In choosing the Real Test, the judge has broken away from 4 decades of legal history.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

But whatever the test, is what Shadrake written in the book true?

Or is truth not so clearcut and straightforward, like depending on how you see it?

I am a lay person so I ask simple common sense questions.

Inherent, real or what not test too "cheem" (Hokien for deep) for me.

Anonymous said...

Well,we shall see who would break history by abstaining fr the so called big picture,we are Asian bullshit and live up to their pleade of Nothing but the TRUTH.

It will happen but the question is when and by who?

Singaporte judges are supposed to be world class but LKY paid them above world class such as they hae no option but to compile,he is such a smart alex to purchase the intellectuals world wide,most of them anyway

Anonymous said...

Asiaone.com was quick to report that:
"British author guilty of insulting Singapore judiciary".

Link: http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20101103-245492.html

Anonymous said...

I think there is no surprise that he would be found guilty, no matter what test. The real question is still in the open: How much of the book is a reflection of reality?

Anonymous said...

I think it's not wise for charging Shadrake guilty for insulting the judiciary, this will indirectly tell others that they are guilty on Shadrake book. If his book is not correct than what's the need for charging him ONLY insulting then challenging his book.

Anonymous said...

Oh, this is interesting.

Since the book is banned in Singapore and the nearest bookstore that carries it is in Malaysia, how will the court ever find out about the number of pple questioning the integrity of our legal system.

(On a side note, do I even need the book to question the integrity of our courts?)

Anonymous said...

It's fascinating but will be forgottened soon.

Anonymous said...

What Singapore needs is a Justice Bao aka 包青天。 Especially one who can sing, like the one above :)

kangaroo logic said...

fully concur with anon @ 07.49
even without Alan Shadrake's book, many sporeans are able to question the integrity of the courts.

NGOs and IBA should propose to Law Minister Shanmugam to conduct an Independent Poll with singaporeans to determine once and for all the prevailing perception of the Sin judiciary...only if his PAP has the stomach to face the brutal truth.

ps: if the overall percentage of negative views from the poll is 20%or more, then it is reasonable to conclude the Sin judiciary is questionable, anything higher will justify the label "kangaroo"

Anonymous said...

if it is not true, who bother to sue him?

Alan Wong said...

If that book is allowed to be brought back from Johor as there are no official ban on it, it means it is perfectly legal to own the book but yet why is it that our local bookstores not allowed to stock and sell it ?

And if it is perfectly legal to own the book, then why is it they didn't see it fit to publish the 14 statements as if they are so obscene ?

Doesn't our Govt owe us an explanation what is actually happening ?

Or is it they rather that we do not know the actual facts of the case ?

Anonymous said...

the pap just want to babysit our entire life including what we can say or not say, how many kids we should have, how we buy a flat etc...but blame us when we ask them for solutions to our woes.