tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post3495471465638086155..comments2024-03-19T18:44:15.041+08:00Comments on Little Stories: My Personal Memories of RapeGilbert Koh aka Mr Wanghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01027678080233274309noreply@blogger.comBlogger61125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-1742010100752338742009-12-01T19:22:01.250+08:002009-12-01T19:22:01.250+08:00Actually, false rape accusations is more common th...Actually, false rape accusations is more common than thought to be:http://www.familieslink.co.uk/download/jan07/False%20rape%20claims%20common.pdf<br /><br />"A further investigation by independent reviewers found that 60% of the rape allegations are false"<br /><br />And that victims of false rape accusations face just as much psychological trauma as victims of rape: http://www.freewebs.com/ferniesidethreecampaign/falseaccusations.htm<br /><br />http://www.falserape.net/false-rape.htm<br /><br />CNN's Tucker Carlson recently wrote a book, Politicians, Partisans and Parasites, which includes an account of Carlson being falsely accused of raping a woman. Carlson describes how a false rape accusation can potentially ruin a man's life. http://www.equityfeminism.com/archives/years/2003/000062.html · How the legal system allows women to physically abuse men http://www.batteredmen.com/index.htm <br /><br />I believe that, after reading these sentences, just as rape victims should be sympathised with, victims of false rape accusations should be.<br /><br />The unfortunate that is that while alot of rape cases may NOT be brought up to court, alot of false rape allegations have not been detected by our current legal system.<br /><br />One of the biggest dichotomy that this no to rape petition does not address, is that while our current situation lets a potential criminal's off more leniently while abusing his wife, the proposed scenario allows a female criminal get away more leniently with falsely accusing her husband.<br /><br />Classic hobson's dilema.<br /><br />I would like to encourage the proponents to re-think their proposal lest they create more problems for society.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09593875123344078500noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-52153238432773197342009-09-23T01:45:48.860+08:002009-09-23T01:45:48.860+08:00Hi, I managed to find the case about the Navy Sgt....Hi, I managed to find the case about the Navy Sgt. Citation of the case is PP v N [1999] 4 SLR 619. I supposed you are Mr Gilbert Koh and not Mr Wang? :)Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10577200067092376971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-21376078960135985812009-08-25T16:19:15.612+08:002009-08-25T16:19:15.612+08:00To Satya: Are you kidding? This is SINGAPORE. '...To Satya: Are you kidding? This is SINGAPORE. 'Human dignity' and 'Constitution' are never mentioned in the same breath.<br /><br />If you're a practicing lawyer-to-be in Singapore, I sincerely hope to see you argue Art 12 successfully in our courts, against all odds.<br /><br />Anonymous: LOL!!<br /><br />Cheers.bluBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16625600904359822072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-42035822417619629892009-08-22T04:53:03.104+08:002009-08-22T04:53:03.104+08:00Later, Yong gave a written judgment for this case,...<i>Later, Yong gave a written judgment for this case, thereby immortalising my name in Singapore's legal history (lawyers and law students can look me up in the Singapore Law Reports, or in the Lawnet database).</i><br /><br />My god. So you are the Navy sergeant? You don't seem like the kind of person.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-83141323905287488442009-08-19T14:03:01.026+08:002009-08-19T14:03:01.026+08:00Dear Mr Wang
I'm an international student stu...Dear Mr Wang<br /><br />I'm an international student studying here in Singapore. I don't know if Singapore law works in quite the same way as it does in other ex-British colonies (like Malaysia where I'm from).<br /><br />But if you brought this case all the way to the Supreme Court 10 years ago, then couldn't the Court strike down the relevant provisions in the Penal Code as unconstitutional?<br /><br />Surely there's an argument to be made that the provision violates certain basic aspects of human dignity, which without having read Singapore's constitution, I'm sure it guarantees?Satyahttp://theworldaccordingtosatya.blog.friendster.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-56822989032456950872009-08-19T12:20:42.346+08:002009-08-19T12:20:42.346+08:00Wow, I can't believe the anon @ August 17, 200...Wow, I can't believe the anon @ August 17, 2009 12:41 AM who said this:<br /><br /><i>"If this stupid law is passed, if marital rape immunity is removed even for men who have no reason to believe that their wife should reject sex, this will be a WMD for women seeking divorce in the fastest and most vicious way. No man will want to be accused of rape. They will settle out of court and agree to anything the woman demands.<br /><br />And there are men stupid enough to support this."</i><br /><br />Maybe you consider that the men who support this petition are also stupid enough to get lousy vicious wives, are stupid enough to force said wives to have sex without consent, and are also stupid enough to leave evidence of rape upon which charges can be pressed.<br /><br />Hmm... maybe, just maybe, the men who support this petition are smarter than that? Maybe they won't marry such lousy vicious wives, won't force said wives to have sex without consent, and - even if they do - won't leave evidence of rape upon which charges can be pressed?<br /><br />Maybe all these men's marriages deserve to be preserved so they can pass their smart genes to the next generation, while the stupid men who don't support the petition will get divorced as a result and hopefully not spread their stupid seed around.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-21495033006499412442009-08-18T23:35:45.462+08:002009-08-18T23:35:45.462+08:00Hi Mr wang,
Thanks for responding to my err... qu...Hi Mr wang,<br /><br />Thanks for responding to my err... question. Personally, ape do find the immunity provision archaic.<br /><br />Putting everything in perspective, people seems to have an impression that just because some lady cry rape, some man is almost certainly going to jail. Thus, there was this fear that the mrs may be setting an entrapment for the mr to fall into.<br /><br />However, ape guess the reality is not so. The prosecutor has to be thoroughly convinced that he has a case before he press charges which can also mean that real victims, due to lack of evidence, will not be able to their aggressors put to jail. With the immunity provision in place... it becomes impossible.<br /><br />On the lighter side of things, ape imagines himself pulling out a consent form for mrs ape to sign should she want to erm... be a bit exciting and creative :pApenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-5690085523641986112009-08-18T18:18:22.608+08:002009-08-18T18:18:22.608+08:00wah. mr wang, if you started collecting tuition fe...wah. mr wang, if you started collecting tuition fees from the beginning. your mortgage on your new house could have already been cleared. LOL!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-50173832326237581852009-08-18T17:10:38.863+08:002009-08-18T17:10:38.863+08:00Dear Mr Wang,
perhaps the police might be sensiti...Dear Mr Wang,<br /><br />perhaps the police might be sensitive but what if the wife started spreading rumours? <br />Names might not be mentioned but if busybodies or friends of wife started hinting of marital rape and so on..........<br /><br />As for not being named, as far as i know, newspapers will not name but there is the fear that something will leak or so on, and hey who can say it will not appear? With the advent of the net, anything can happen. Just my thoughts here. Like the wife can write a blog on the court proceedings..... <br /><br />To those who say what if ur daughter gets involved in marital rape and what if your son gets involved in a false accusation, this is very ocntentious.<br /><br />I am sure the daughter will get some kind of protection under the law, and the husband will not get away 100% free. As for the falsely accused son, well it depends on whether the son is willing to live on a clear conscience before God but "dirty before the world". Many people cannot handle that cos there is the desire to appear of clear conscience before the rest of society. Unless of course, there is the plan to migrate...<br /><br />An example is that I might have been falsely accused of stealing but subsequently found it was a misunderstanding. Clear conscience but when all my friends look at me as a thief, I can go into depression. I can make new friends and try to start again nbut can still go ionto depression (though not suicide).<br /><br />Juz my tots.<br /><br />PhilipAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-42317126899821449522009-08-18T11:30:34.263+08:002009-08-18T11:30:34.263+08:00Wang, agree with protecting women in marriage.
Bu...Wang, agree with protecting women in marriage.<br /><br />But what about protecting men in marriage?<br /><br />To be very base, men get married to have exclusive sexual rights to a woman, as would the women to the men (actually man).<br /><br />It is very difficult for a man to prove "denial of service" against his wife. Especially with ego and stigma thrown in. This distortion in empowering the women against the needs of men in a marriage, may probably be why the divorce rates are going up.<br /><br />Now we stack it up with a marital rape law.<br /><br />For men to give up his multiple mating instincts, then deny him rights to sex or restrict it to as and when the women feels like it, I think many men will choose to stay single. Or marry later.<br /><br />Do you not think PM should be really worried about marriage and kids now?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-36480165054977000042009-08-18T08:17:05.700+08:002009-08-18T08:17:05.700+08:00"wait till your OWN SON gets accused of marit..."wait till your OWN SON gets accused of marital rape by his wife, then perhaps you as a man and a FATHER will wake up from your backwardness.<br /><br />Next please?"<br /><br />LOLOLOL... i have two SONS actually, and no daughters. if my sons are accused of marital rape, i would ask them to own up if they have done it. otherwise, i'll tell them not to worry, because God knows they have not done that, and it's for the prosecutor to prove beyond doubt that they have done it.<br /><br />next please.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-477475489725807252009-08-17T22:20:27.594+08:002009-08-17T22:20:27.594+08:00Philip,
I understand that in incest crimes, the p...Philip,<br /><br />I understand that in incest crimes, the perpetrator is not named in public even if he is eventually found to be guilty. This is to protect the name of the victim. If the marital rape immunity gets lifted, I think it would stand to reason that both the wife and the husband would not be named.<br /><br />As for the police investigation itself bringing stigma, i.e. police calling up your company main line to ask to speak to you, that is a question of police sensitivity. Supposedly, the police are already well-trained to handle the present domestic violence investigations which are equally sensitive and as potentially stigmatising. I cannot really comment on whether they do do that sensitively because I do not know. That might be best asked around to find out.SMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12557943676967548787noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-12802770912775030312009-08-17T16:09:41.370+08:002009-08-17T16:09:41.370+08:00I think the problem is this.
1) If there is no l...I think the problem is this.<br /><br />1) If there is no law preventing marital rape, wives would be at risk from abusive husbands.<br /><br />2) If there is a law preventing marital rape, husbands would be at the mercy the of wives who are willing to lie. <br /><br />I will focus on 2) as it seems to be the contentiou area.<br /><br />As far as 2) is concerned, the issue is that the accusation of a marital rapist is enough to ruin a person, regardless of legal verdict. After all, a man accused of marital rape (even if disproved) would always carry a stigma.<br /><br />Even if the woman was found to be lying and is actually jailed, there will always be ppl who think that maybe the man got a better lawyer, the woman was scared, the law unjust....... So the man will still suffer.<br /><br />And since the man is innocent, he will worry about losing so many things even if he were to be proven innocent; hence he will give in to the woman to prevent all the problems from happening.<br /><br />PhilipAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-65456151657442872982009-08-17T12:53:34.676+08:002009-08-17T12:53:34.676+08:001) If the Chief Justice was not aware of marital r...1) If the Chief Justice was not aware of marital rape immunity, what deterrent effect do we expect removing this immunity? Reply this so I can use this against you when you argue the lack of deterrence against the death penalty.<br /><br />2) If assault charges lack bite, the solution ought to increase it to at least match the outrage of modesty. Why is that the law cant care less when a man is beaten up silly ("Non-seizable offence"?) but unleashes it's full wrath when a man pinches the buttock of a woman? <br /><br />Oh wait, is it because a woman can be charged for assault against a man, but only a man can be charged for rape against a woman? <br /><br />Even for outrage of modesty, it is always used against men. A woman can point her middle finger at a man and walk away scot free. The man do the same, he becomes a sex offender.<br /><br />Gimmicks like "No to rape" is just another way feminists wants to use political correctness to attack male rights. I pity the men who willingly become their tool.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-67902561262713633372009-08-17T12:41:33.651+08:002009-08-17T12:41:33.651+08:00Mr Wang
I have 2 very relevant and important issu...Mr Wang<br /><br />I have 2 very relevant and important issues to clear with you. The first is a question which I asked for you expert legal opinion, which you left unanswered. Here it is again.<br /><br />Issue 1 - Suppose both husband and wife agree to separate on 16 Aug 2009 and have that written on the same day, as per Section 375(4,a,iv), and wife proceeds to move out of house to live apart from husband. Husband then proceeds to force sex on her on 17 Aug 09. Can he now be charged for rape?<br /><br /><br />Issue 2 - You said on August 17, 2009 12:26 PM:<br />Because as a matter of legal principle, if the Penal Code grants husbands the right to forcibly penetrate their wives, it would not be right for the prosecution to prosecute husbands for OM (Outrage of Modesty),...<br />>><br /><br />Me: <br />Is Pandora's Box now going to be opened? So if the marital rape immunity is lifted, technically, it would be possible to charge husband for OM too. Technically, wife can claim husband has outrage her modesty if the notorape has statute amended.<br /><br />Am I correct in my intepretation, or have I misintepreted them?Hermithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17512674272141731940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-70781426520204946272009-08-17T12:32:05.327+08:002009-08-17T12:32:05.327+08:00"You said that N kidnapped his wife. Then why..."You said that N kidnapped his wife. Then why couldn't the procecutor charge him with kidnap?"<br /><br />-----<br /><br />I used the word "kidnap" more loosely than the actual technical legal definition of the word.<br /><br />"Kidnap" would probably be an apt word for the layman's view of what happened that day.<br /><br />If you had to prove it in the technical sense, though, the evidence in that case probably was not sufficient to meet the required standard (bear in mind that as prosecution, you need to establish your case beyond a reasonable doubt).<br /><br />I think that there was a reasonable doubt that the man did not "kidnap" her ... eg that when he pulled her hair and hit her head, he wasn't forcing her into the car, but just feeling extremely angry that she wouldn't enter the car voluntarily ... and that the woman then changed her mind and decided to enter the car with him.Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01027678080233274309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-33246446324265408942009-08-17T12:26:34.563+08:002009-08-17T12:26:34.563+08:00"The problem here is not so much that the man..."The problem here is not so much that the man cannot be charged; he can be charged for a variety of crimes, but the problem really is the sentence is not sufficiently tough."<br /><br />-----<br /><br /><br />You're wrong. <br /><br />I'll tell you a little more about PP v N. <br /><br />Every rape offence, by definition, covers all the elements of another offence "outrage of modesty". <br /><br />In other words, every rape is an OM, but not every OM is a rape. <br /><br />(Similarly, every robbery is a theft, but not every theft is a robbery. Robbery is approximately equal to theft + violence).<br /><br />Now, OM can attract quite a severe punishment as well. However, N was not charged for OM.<br /><br />Why?<br /><br />Because as a matter of legal principle, if the Penal Code grants husbands the right to forcibly penetrate their wives, it would not be right for the prosecution to prosecute husbands for OM, and thereby effectively find a backdoor around the marital immunity exception. The prosecution has got to respect the spirit of the law, as it stands. <br /><br />Now, the above argument is debatable (I was quite unconvinced by it myself, 10 years ago) but it was the view taken by very senior DPPs back then. <br /><br />N was therefore prosecuted for offences which can stand quite separately without any sexual element - voluntarily causing hurt etc.Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01027678080233274309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-67320946114634013162009-08-17T12:18:44.867+08:002009-08-17T12:18:44.867+08:00The history of the law is quite amusing sometimes....The history of the law is quite amusing sometimes.<br /><br />The Penal Code was created by some white man called Stephen MacCaulay. He single-handedly created the law for Singapore, Malaysia and India (all of which were controlled by the British at that time).<br /><br />Stephen was of the opinion that men who raped women should be severely punished (that's why rape actually carries one of the heaviest sentences in the Penal Code).<br /><br />He made a complete exception for husbands and wives. Why?<br /><br />Because he was a Christian. At that time in history, Christians were very much into the idea that if a man married a woman, then in the eyes of God, they became one person.<br /><br />Well, you can't possibly rape yourself, can you? So if a man and woman are husband and wife, it can't be possible for husbands to be guilty of rape.<br /><br />That was the rationale then. It might even have made sense then. After all, 180+ years ago, the world was really quite a different place.Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01027678080233274309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-73186062877715788682009-08-17T12:14:17.782+08:002009-08-17T12:14:17.782+08:00I understand why some people are saying the things...I understand why some people are saying the things they say here. But really it stems from a misunderstanding of how the law works.<br /><br />They are confused about the evidentiary aspects of the law.<br /><br />One person can falsely accuse another person of rape. He or she can also falsely accuse the person of theft; robbery; assault; cheating; criminal intimidation and a few hundred other crimes. <br /><br />Can he or she prove it? That is the question. <br /><br />People who believe that they can just anyhow anyhow accuse somebody of an offence and thereby cause the person to be convicted for 10 years ....<br /><br />.... have just been watching too many soap operas.Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01027678080233274309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-63084792739519686202009-08-17T10:08:22.443+08:002009-08-17T10:08:22.443+08:00wait till your OWN SON gets accused of marital rap...wait till your OWN SON gets accused of marital rape by his wife, then perhaps you as a man and a FATHER will wake up from your backwardness.<br /><br />Next please?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-45249681336445846982009-08-17T10:00:39.240+08:002009-08-17T10:00:39.240+08:00To those who think passing the law will open the f...To those who think passing the law will open the floodgates to women abusing it for whatever reason, think again. <br /><br />We might as well abolish the laws that can bring charges against a man for molestation, since a woman can also falsely accuse a man of molesting her. <br /><br />"The problem here is not so much that the man cannot be charged; he can be charged for a variety of crimes, ... "<br /><br />And why should he be charged for other crimes, when the rape IS the deciding devastating crime? <br /><br />"... if marital rape immunity is removed even for men who have no reason to believe that their wife should reject sex,... "<br /><br />Does that mean a wife has no reason whatsoever to reject her husband's DEMAND for sex?<br /><br />"How often do women get charged for falsely accusing rape?"<br /><br />So, do men even get charged for raping their wives? Unless you are saying there is really no such thing as a man raping his wife.小肥与阿宝https://www.blogger.com/profile/15870329836270170996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-90128366360095280442009-08-17T09:58:35.859+08:002009-08-17T09:58:35.859+08:00I know of a case where the wife intentionally fake...I know of a case where the wife intentionally fakes overseas travel to catch her husband cheating. The reason? She wanted a no fuss fast divorce and equal share of the property. That confrontation nearly turned into a stabbing fest, especially since the "henchman" she brought along was her lover.<br /><br />In fact, from what the husband discovered, the wife could have been cheating from day 1 and married him for money. <br /><br />If a million dollar is at stake, I fail to see how gold diggers will hold themselves back from abusing the law.<br /><br />You cannot change the balance of the law without corresponding changes to divorce laws (WOMEN'S charter) that aims only to protect the woman. <br /><br />Why must the man lower his standard of living in a divorce to preserve the woman's standard of living?<br /><br />Furthermore, as far as I know, Singaporean courts give women the benefit of doubt as far as sex crimes are concerned. All she needs is a consistent bulletproof testimony. No need for witness or evidence. The burden is on the accused to poke holes in her testimony.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-18334262829240858742009-08-17T08:58:15.516+08:002009-08-17T08:58:15.516+08:00"How often do women get charged for falsely a..."How often do women get charged for falsely accusing rape?"<br /><br />as often as other people get charged for falsely accusing others.<br /><br />wait till your OWN DAUGHTER gets raped by her husband, then perhaps you as a man and a FATHER will wake up from your backwardness.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-71992185538480095642009-08-17T00:41:00.541+08:002009-08-17T00:41:00.541+08:00This is a classic AWARE type feminist trying to se...This is a classic AWARE type feminist trying to seize for women to power against men, especially when this law has absolutely nothing to lose as far as the women are concerned.<br /><br />The problem here is not so much that the man cannot be charged; he can be charged for a variety of crimes, but the problem really is the sentence is not sufficiently tough. (For a blogger advocating against the excessive vindictiveness of the death penalty, the irony is rich.)<br /><br />How often do women get charged for falsely accusing rape?<br /><br />If this stupid law is passed, if marital rape immunity is removed even for men who have no reason to believe that their wife should reject sex, this will be a WMD for women seeking divorce in the fastest and most vicious way. No man will want to be accused of rape. They will settle out of court and agree to anything the woman demands.<br /><br />And there are men stupid enough to support this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-19706233864276314932009-08-16T23:20:19.943+08:002009-08-16T23:20:19.943+08:00So why the double standards when it comes to marit...<i>So why the double standards when it comes to marital rape?</i><br /><br />Because rape is not treated the same as other crimes.<br /><br />Sex, Culture, and the Biology of Rape: Toward Explanation and Prevention<br />http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=611908<br /><br />"Despite great theoretical potential for cultural variability, forced penile-vaginal intercourse is an inflammatory and serious offense in every known society. This is true, despite the fact that there are many acts of <i>physical</i> violence (say, cutting off a leg) that are, on average, more physically harmful than rape. All over the planet, rape makes women fearful and angry, and it makes nonraping males who are fathers, husbands, brothers, sons, and friends of the raped female livid to the point of the most extreme forms of violence and retribution-seeking. There is no research of which I am aware to suggest that it has not always been thus. (Even the <i>Coker</i> Court conceded that “[s]hort of homicide, [rape] is the ‘ultimate violation of self.”) Note too that the widest variety of legal systems, including our own, formally proscribe rape with harsh penalties. Although the complexities of the crime, the difficulties of proving lack of consent, and the vicissitudes of local attitudes have often made rape underreported, underprosecuted, and underpunished, convicted rapists still tend to be subject to unusually harsh penalties, including even death. The severity of these penalties is clear when compared to the physical harm typically inflicted, and to the less severe penalties that typically follow from even more physically severe nonsexual harms.<br /><br />Footnote: "Tedeschi and Felson, supra note 116, at 334 (1994) "A cross-cultural survey of 100 societies from the Human Relations Area Files showed that rape is one of the three most heavily punished crimes""Agagoogahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11427912904378599921noreply@blogger.com