Man jailed for self defence

last SG · 2006-03-15T15:19:20+00:00

A side note, was Kan Ting Chiu the presiding judge?

Uncle_MooMoo SG

so how long was he jailed?

Devil1976 SG

Maybe that's just the way they just it to be?

And it's not as if they can't change it anytime if things are not to their advantage? Cool

Devil1976 SG

Agree. When is not 'over-doing it'?

Who knows you just stop there, end up that guy springs back at you and stab you dead instead...?

Should we all practise that for our attackers...? Might as well we all convert to Buddhism....?

Devil1976 SG

Yes. You should have ASKED NICELY 1st... If that doesn't work THEN you try OTHER METHODS.... Laughing

Devil1976 SG

Cool

fai SG

what part of a human body can be repeatedly stabbed without killing the person?

doghouse837 SG

the limit of of self defence is only up to remove the immediate danger. in his case, when he run away is counted as self defence. but the wrong thing he had done is to use weapon and stab the other party, in other words, he is now the offensive party. therefore he could not be said of self defence. and stabbing the other parties repeatly, shows he had intention of injuring the other party.
I agreed with the judge sentence.

hisoka SG

no he stab to prevent hurt to himself that is selfdefence. repeated maybe mental state whatever i dunnno but stabbing a few more times to make sure the person cannt get up and kill you sounds reasonable.....

doghouse837 SG

The problem with it is because he use weapon, and the other party only use bare hands. So which is the attacking party.
In singapore contents, the right of self defence is only able to use the same or less amount of force. In his case, he is use far too much force.

hisoka SG

actually i was criticizing the law. not the judgement per se.

anyway i really have to question whether using a weapon against 2 pple is really more than the amount of force.

assuming the story was correct its obvious who was the attacking party whoever had the weapon.

again dumb stipulation of less or same amount of force. while i admit its to prevent pple from just killing when attacked with a weapon, same or less is insufficient to eliminate the threat.

doghouse837 SG

How u so sure that the 2 ppl would kill him with their bare hand? No one can know the future outcome right??
But when the guy took out the weapon, he is already in the wrong.
The self defence that he can use is only using his hands and legs to push them back, and run. That the most self defence can cover him under singapore law.
I agreed with the singapore law, for example 2 skinny ppl is beating a well built person, can the well built person use weapon against them??

hisoka SG

even if they wont kill him,, they would have seriously hurt him all else being equal. he took out the weapon to protect himself, nothing wrong with that, if you have to kill some one attack you to save yourself nothing wrong doing that right? especially when its not a confirm kill by a knife no matter what you think.

using hands and legs to push them away is ineffective and chances are would lead him to get hurt more, are you sure he can psuh them and run?? i did say the main issue was the law didn't i?

your example is absurd. very well if you want to play. then what if a skinny(unskilled) man was attacked by 2 well built man who can out run him? how can he protect himself without the use of weapons?

to be more reasonable, we should look at an average person being set upon by 2 other average pple. do you think its likely that person can defend himself without weapons? for running, i also do not think its effective. lets take the 3 average pple again, they would be able to run roughly the same distance and time so he cannot run away + when he is running he is vunerable to assult from behind.

LazerLordz SG

Since when has proportional responsibility been acceptable by the local courts..or else we would not have people hanged for drugs and old ladies jailed for unknowningly letting their flats out to illegals. Rolling Eyes

hisoka SG

huh?? dun throw law terms leh, we are dumb pple here

LazerLordz SG

no leh. not law terms haha.

proportional responsibility = how much of that crime is the person's responsibility..or something like that. Embarassed

doghouse837 SG

The trick is to make the other off balance. Trip the other party to fall. and that would do it. Thats why in singapore, there are so many course that teach ppl self defence. Even it is a bigger size.
Using weapon is always a wrong wrong thing to do.

JLennon SG

The rest of the newspaper article will explain better the concept of self-defence:

QUOTE

What if you kill to protect yourself?

CAN you walk away scot-free?

Lawyer Amolat Singh said: 'The judges would look at the amount of force and the means used to defend oneself.

'If a man punches me with his bare hands and I take out a parang and hack him to death, the force I use would be disproportionate.'

Mr Amolat said the judges would also assess what the defendant was thinking when he committed the act.

Issues such as whether he had meant to kill the other party would be taken into account.

'On hindsight, we may think it was rash to stab the other man in self-defence. But sometimes you don't have the luxury of time to rationalise your actions,' Mr Amolat said.

Lawyer Subhas Anandan said: 'Nothing is an offence if it is done in the exercise of self defence.

'But if you had the time to call the police, then your actions can't be justified as self-defence.'

UNDUE ADVANTAGE

Mr Anandan said the actions of Neo Eng Kiat exceeded the right of self defence.

'He had undue advantage as he had a weapon and acted in great cruelty as he stabbed the other man repeatedly.

'So he couldn't invoke right of self-defence.'

Lawyer Kertar Singh, who defended Neo, said everyone has the right to self-defence.

'But you also have to consider the circumstances. In my client's case, he stabbed his attacker repeatedly after the latter fell down.

'So his actions were beyond self-defence as there was definitely an intention to cause injury.'

During the trial, Mr Kertar cited similar cases where defendants received light sentences of between 3 and 3 1/2 years after killing someone in a fight.

One was the case of cleaner Katun Bee Ibrahim, 56, who was jailed 3 1/2 years on 6 Jan, 2004, for culpable homicide.

During a fight with her lover G. Subramaniam on 13 Jan, 2003, Katun fatally stabbed him in the abdomen after blinding him with chilli powder.

Another case was of durian seller Lim Boon Seng, 40, who was jailed 3 1/2 years on 27 May, 2004, for culpable homicide.

During a fight with loanshark Keng Yew Cheng, 42, on 5 Nov, 2003, over a $1,800 debt, Lim fatally stabbed Keng in the chest.

UNQUOTE

JLennon SG

Key issue before one is able to invoke the right of self-defence is whether there has been a disproportionate amount of force used by the defendant on his assailant.

iveco SG

We are better off ruled from Canberra. Enough said. Neutral

iveco SG

In the heat of battle, anything can go happen.

Also, how many people remember to clean out their pockets after each fishing trip?

« Previous Page Next Page »