Thread by @sharanvkaur

i don't know who made the police reports or these images but they were both shared on the Singapore Matters FB page, a pro-PAP page that's willing to play fast and loose with facts.

she wasn't the only one to ask about perceived differences in sentencing and/or enforcement. the police statement is misrepresenting her questions as comments or statements of fact.

straitstimes.com/singapore/covi…

about the city harvest post. this 2yo post was made on 2 Feb, three days before Law Minister Shanmugam addressed this in Parliament. again, it reflected widespread public sentiment that church leaders got off lightly, and that legislation against corruption was weak.

i don't see how either of these posts (questions!!) 'promote enmity between different groups on grounds of religion or race'.

hell, i think "who did they pay" is a valid enough question, when the answer is Edwin Tong!! who defended Kong Hee!! and gave an interview about why there was no conflict of interest!! 🤯

channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore…

the issue of *perceived* lack of fairness of the legal system isn't new, but idt you shld punish someone for their perceptions. again, this is a conversation that *society* must have.

remember woffles wu? seah hock thiam? are we gonna charge all these people for feelings?

sylvia lim asked questions about one of the cases in parliament, and shanmugam said she was politicising the issue 🤯

read it yourself, the whole thing's wack

sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/topic?r…

if the law was perfect, we wouldn't need to make amendment to penal codes or ... idk, have parliament sit at all.

shanmugam gets to say when he is surprised by court verdicts, whether it's repping the govt in the CHC case or his personal view re TS.

do citizens not get to?

sometimes rich people say things like this! is this supposed to not influence my perception of the legal system in any way?