Wednesday, February 14, 2007

A Lulu Lesson On Valentine's Day

The lesson of the day is How To Postpone a 10 Year Jail Sentence

1. On Valentine's day, go "kou" (court) a girl.

2. Marry her

3. Have kids. Lots of them. Have them over as wide a span as your wife can take it. If can, 20 years.

4. Work your way to senior management.

5. Embezzle money

6. Drama a bit, have one of your children studying medicine.

Then comes the worse case scenario

7. Get caught

8. Found guilty. Sentenced 10 years jail

9. Appeal. Apply for stay of execution on grounds like
a> detention in the Kajang prisons had caused your children to suffer serious mental stress and their education would be affected.
b>children could not sit for his examination following the stress.
c> concern than the child would not be able to complete his studies.
d> have to finance the expenses of his daughter, who was studying accountancy at UiTM Sarawak, and his son, enrolled in a primary school here.
See, if the age span of your children is 20 years, you could postpone the sentence for twenty years. Keep on appealing, keep on applying for stay of execution.

It works. This is how the Tabung Haji duo, even though they have been found guilty and sentenced to 16 years' jail last month for criminal breach of trust and cheating involving RM200mil managed to delay their stay in jail whilst waiting for the appeal.

Sessions judge Akhtar Tahir said he did not want the children of both Datuk Mohd Amin Sidek, 56, and Mohamad Shafie, 57, to suffer the consequences.
Akhtar said he had considered that one of Mohd Amin's children was studying medicine at University of Dublin in Ireland and that he also did not want the future of Mohamad's children to be affected.
Kinda makes you feel mm-tei (unfair) for all those sob stories mothers who shoplifted RM30 milk powder for their hungry babies and end up in jail.

AND if you think about it, ARB's lawyers should have used this as his defense, "anak kat universiti, bimbang trauma" instead of some flimsy medical reason.

And since it's still Wednesday, February14th,


Anonymous said...

The truth that the wise always knew is that making children indiscriminately often result in furthering poverty. The Buddha has declared 2600 years ago that marriage is a man-made institution - just as its product is.

Some people and culture however always don't care a damn about that - from the African poverty laden savannah land to the rural Bolehland esp. No planning needed, it's so natural, even a duty the interest of demographic warfare, consciously or unconsciously.

An old pak haji with multiple wives interviewed and 3 dozen children living in fair squalor will proudly present his products.

Greed comees in many varied form.


Anonymous said...

So, if greed increases desire/needs, is that other people's fault?

It really boils down to attitude and taking personal responsibility. Cutting the cloth according to one's breath is a personal responsibilty. Flout at own peril....hardly a legit neverending sob story aka excuse. Surely not a virtue.


warrior2 said...

I dont see any issue here or any miscarriage of justice. The law provides for an appeal process, stay of execution and bail. If the judge concern saw it fit to give bail, and he has the authority to decides that, why are you making an issue?

If a mother steals RM30 worth of milk, or an indonesian steals 25 eggs, its up to them to seek whatever justice they are entitled to under the law!

ksq said...

if it is within the law, so be it. but what goes around, comes around and justice comes in many form.

often payback is pretty messy.

Anonymous said...

Some wise pious-looking crook with a holier-than-thou face (like BM's) will come up with the idea of having 4 spaced-out wives with 30 children spanned over a period of 60years. The NEP will take good care of his kids while he can get a stay of execution for 60 years, ie until he goes to the big playground in the sky where all the houris are waiting for him.

Anonymous said...

A mom who steals 30 bucks of milk powder out of need cannot be held as in the same league as an embezzler of millions.

It should not really have to need a court of appeal to fix what any asshat judge simply screw-up, wasting both time, money and manpower, in the process. Law and judgement without a human case will always end up favoring the elites.

Perhaps some ppl here will remember that the local rapist/serial killer of women, Lee Chow Meng, who died in prison from AID a few years back, received a sentence about equal to Anwar's - around 15 years.

Speak of just-ice!


warrior2 said...

anon of 403, it seems to me you dont understand laws and why they are as such.

would a mum who stole 2 tins of milk gets the same sentence as a mum who stole 30 tins?
How do you sentence a man who stole 1 egg over a man who stole 1 lorry full of eggs?
If a man is convicted of a CBT case of RM 100, what would you think be the penalty for a mum who stole 30 tins of milk amounting to RM6oo? SHould she gets more jail term or fined more?

Anonymous said...

Yours truly does not understand why the technicalities of the law must usually triumph over commonsense reasoning. Is it not because the ppl in the field chose to fallback on legal technicalities for ease of operation, rather than employing enough commonsense understanding of fairness?

Afterall the law is made for man rather than man for the law. Seems like one makes a law and the executing of it becomes mechanical yet subjectively inconsistent....just because legality is thereby maintained.


zewt said...

in this country... anything is possible. i wonder what will happen to the razak baginda dude... speakign of which... no more news on him eh... enjoying his millions already perhaps.

Anonymous said...

ZEWT, dia dalam jail la. Mana ada enjoy. Awak ada otak ka?