"Coincidentally, Jean did not report the case to the police (in SG or SK) till now, when John is asking for his money back."

False.

"My only curiousity is about Jean's claim that police won't prosecute John even if John admits the offence. On this, I'd seek attention from some smart people."

Lack of jurisdiction.

Interestingly enough, if you take pot overseas and come back to Singapore you can be arrested and sent to jail.

If you check the IP address of www.jean.sg and blog.simplyjean.com, both are hosted on the same server 208.87.242.2

What more can you say?

I can say that limpeh is the author of all the blogs hosted on the .blogspot.com domain.

What about instances where men are being subjected to slaps/pinches on the butt or have had touchy feely female friends/homosexuals caressing them? Can men sue for outage of modesty as well? Men can feel violated too.

can lah.

It is possible that Jean may want to split her self into varied scenes to focus. After all, some people may not want to get dirty linens in one blog records.

Besides can anyone confirm those Jeans are the same person?

I am not really sure if Jean is a good gal. But in this case, I am not jumping on conclusions of characters. Anyway, just watch on. This story is going to the climax.

Ti;me wastnng

Actually, I am blogging about her case later.

But Aaron, Durai did not lose because he blew the case up, Durai lost because because he probably felt invinsible. He won a couple of times in court, he engineered the 'facts' and hde the truths, he organized simpletons and so on, and he thought he can self-enrich as long as he gained the trust of the government.

Jean's case is different. This fact of S$48,000 is not really an issue. Do allow me to explain briefly in my blog.

Actually, blogging is two ways. Jean can blog her concerns, so can John. It's after all their own accounts, and I myself cannot change the truth, and only they know the truths. It may be even a joint attention-seeking effort. LOL~

Nice knowing you.

I think you missed my point. My point is not about whether Durai "blew the case up" outside of the court case. It is rather that suing itself is blowing things up. Durai may have had no choice: he had to sue in order to clear his name. But every time you take something public you run the risk that somebody somewhere will dig something out that puts you in a bad light.

As for the $48,000, you say that legally it has no impact on the molest case. That is correct. But once this fact is out people are not going to be sympathetic towards Jean. They will see her as somebody who keeps the $48,000 (a good person would have told him to go away and not accept the money), and accuses him of molest and ruins his life. And not content with ruining his life through a police report, she broadcasts this to the whole world.

It is perfectly legal to accept the money even though you have no intention of being his girlfriend. But most people will believe there are only 2 possible reasons for him to come up with that money. First he believes that she would be his girlfriend (and she made him believe that.) Secondly, he is extremely stupid. And the first reason is more likely.

Why did she broadcast this to the whole world when she could have just asked a few friends for advice? Doesn't it sound suspicious that a person could be so proud of being molested?

If the molest took place they might not forgive him for it, but at least they will understand what was going through his mind. For the girl, she took the money, led him on, accused him of molest and on top of that announced it to the whole world. Legally she did nothing wrong, she is also a victim but I can see why so many people hold her in contempt. What is legal and what is just is sometimes not the same. The girl takes the money and goes scot free. The guy touches her in 1 moment of weakness, and he could go to jail.

We are talking about different things. You are talking about the court of law. I am talking about the court of public opinion.

Durai had no choice but to sue because that is the only way he can clear his name. Even if he is guilty he had to take chances. If he doesn't sue for defamation then people will assume he is guilty and he will have to step down from NKF.

In any case molest is so difficult to prove in a court of law because if it involves 2 adults in a secluded place (even if that secluded place is in Singapore) it is almost always 1 person's word against another. I wonder how on earth these things get proven in the first place. I believe the $48000 story because there is proof. As for the molest I haven't seen any proof. Did the molest take place or are you just assuming that it did?

As for the power of the state vs the power of the court, I'm going to get into trouble for saying this but what the hell. In a really democratic system, the executive (the cabinet), the legislative (parliament) and the judiciary (the courts) are supposed to be independent of each other. All 3 are supposed to have ways and means of overturning each other's power. The judges are not supposed to blindly go along with whatever the cabinet says, as might happen some of the time.

OMG~ Scope is stupid, so how can talk about so chim of what court of law? Anyway, I no know Durai much, but I am sure many people know he is guilty whether he won or not, and it is those people who were pulling him down. What are the use of the public other than those who know or can tell? They just cheer and jeer as they are watching soccer match, like silly Scope does.

Molest is indeed difficult to prove but my question mark is why even if John confessed, the police won't catch neh? :) No get me wrong, I am not arguing with you, but just curious.

I doubt you will get into trouble for saying what 'they independent', saved that the intepretation here may not be so... correct. Again, it is a very complicated issue here similar to what I have commented: Expecting small senior police to understand global laws and such instead of sticking safely in their own operational boxes of thinking.

I tried to explain but it gets too long. Besides, I am just a silly and ordinary blogger to go into such chim topic. But the court cannot precede the state.

Too chim for us laymen. :)

Singapore is still Singapore. A state is still a state. Idealistic is idealitic, realism is realism, reality is reality. Got time if someday we go for tea, maybe we can drive further into such topic if you can stand the stupidity of Scope. :D

Let's see, any more hot stories... ...

As for public opinion, I myself can't be bothered about public opinions as I have blogged about this. Can I be sure that netizens will have a fair opinion on myself? Or if netizens will have more rational opinions than those offline? Or if netizens and those offlines have more rational opinions as those overseas?

Most people love themselves more than others. :)

I dunno how you got into the state vs court of law thing your statement also very chim, I dun understand:

"whatever contract terms, even civil rules, can be challenged in courts before the judges for justice, but the court cannot preceed the state, and the state is in the hands of the cabinet via mandate through election. "

I dunno you, why if you think this thing very chim also want to go write long essay. I dunno anything lah.

LOL~
Yeah, rant rant only, how can people like us know so much, right?
Nair is lawyer. So is Nair's lawyer. They are smarter than people like Scope.
So very chim I write long long also no know what I writing.

Have a nice day!

Scope.

You should see the latest comments from jean. What a dickhead. Did somebody put a pistol to her head and ask her to blog about the case?

She must be completely stupid to have thought that she had nothing to hide. In law a trial is for the purposes of finding out the truth. You either plead guilty, in which case you settle, get sentenced, or what not, or you plead not guilty, in which case you have a trial. Of course if you have something to hide then you would plead guilty and there will be no trial by blogosphere but this idiot made the same mistake that TT Durai did, of dragging the whole matter out into the open, so basically she deserves every single bit of flak she's getting.

There is nothing wrong that anyone blogs his/her unhappy events.
Why do you need to impose yourself on another's blogging desire?

I don't know if it's wrong morally. If she was using him and scheming to get rid of him by putting that charge on him then it's wrong. If she doesn't like the guy she should not accept money from him, lead him on, and later accuse him of molest.

If she blogged about this to turn the spotlight on the guy and destroy his life then it's backfired spectacularly, and she's stupid not to realise that 1. when the incident becomes big enough all the facts will come out 2. if the facts put her in a bad light she will get all the flak that was meant for the guy.

But I'm saying that it was a mistake. If I tell you not to jump off a tall building, am I imposing on your actions?

The problem with this guy if you can't control your swelling why want to sleep in the same bed with a single girl.

Of course when both parties sleep together in a bed not touching each other is a joke.

Girl invited guy to hotel in a foreign country, and they sleep in the same room and same bed, guy suddenly the below swell hits against the lady, lady accuse man of molestation, why he can't stop it from swelling and control until the next day, then no problem.

Girl can't tahan or boy can't tahan.

A Very big hint as to this just jean’s identity….. it seems that “Just Jean” is one of the 3 contributers to “Simply Jean”…. note that both “Jeans” were in Seoul on March 13 2008.

http://www.sabrina.sg/2008/03/15/no-lg-ks20-for-simply-jeans

http://jean.sg/2008/03/16/the-journey-so-far-days-10-to-12/

By the way this is jean’s photo.

http://www.bmw-sg.com/forums/lounge/25899-photo-person-whom-received-s-48k-gift.html

Damn…. she looks like my ex school mate from VJC…. dunno la…. but that person i knew was an Asean Scholar.

Let me continue to help put some things into perspective here:

1) Guy chases girl for 3 years. During that time, he professes his interest in her, to which she rejects him, but proposes to remain friends. [...right...]
2) Guy gives girl $48 000 - that is enough to buy a small car in Singapore. They are neither married, related, nor in a relationship. Girl somehow comes to the conclusion that this is a gift with no strings attached. [...right...]
3) After not having spoken to guy for a while, girl suddenly calls guy to accompany her, just the two of them, on an overseas trip to Korea. [...right...]
4) While in Korea, they share the SAME BED in the SAME HOTEL ROOM in the same hotel. [...right...]

5) Girl is angry when guy touches her and rubs up against her back while she is sleeping. She spends the rest of the night in the SAME ROOM in front of the computer table, and takes the SAME FLIGHT back with him, without at all talking to him.
6) She ONLY lodges a police report A WEEK LATER when she is in Singapore, where as a NTU student she should know that the police have no jurisdiction outside of Singapore, and so much time has passed since the incident that any possible circumstantial evidence will probably have been all gone by now.
7) She continues to not talk to the guy AT ALL, but she writes a complaint letter against him, such that he loses his job at Manulife.
8) Girl then blogs an entry about how she was molested by Guy, spelling out his full name and place of employment. And of course, leaving out information like how he "gave" her $48 000 or how she caused him to lose his job.
9) When TNP breaks the whole story with his side as well as hers, and we good readers find out that she's being slapped with a lawsuit for the return of the $48 000, as well as a possible suit for defamation because there is no evidence whatsoever of molest, she gets all defensive and self-pitiful and talks about how all she wanted was a goddamn apology.

All together now... R.I.G.H.T...

Girls like you give the rest of us a really stupid name.

poor guy.. manipulated by that wrench.. :X
she should've known, but he should've kept his body parts to himself.

Facts of the case?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaywalk/2592149064/sizes/o/
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3176/2592148632_f4d4fe4a19_o.jpg

1) Girl invited the guy to accompany her to Seoul.
2) Girl did the hotel arrangements - ended up with a single hotel room with a single double bed.
3) Girl willingly sleep on the same bed with guy.
4) Guy touched girl - girl did not protest. (girl claims she froze in fear)
5) Girl claims she feels something on her butt and screams. Guys back off.

Sounds like a case of miscommunication of signals - but the TNP article adds in more details.

6) Guy have been openly chasing the girl for years, - so now point 1-5 reads very differently as we have the girl in question inviting a guy she knows that is very interested in her overseas, and her arrangements put them in a single room in a single bed which she willingly shares with him.

7) Guy have been fetching her with his car for work for extended period, best of all, he have helped girl paid off $48k in loan - the girl calls this a gift.

I am really more inclined to see the guy as a victim than the woman in this case.

Trackback from Jean vs John -- both are innocent till proven guilty:

As per now, both Jean & John should be treated innocent. Jean's persistence in pursuing the matter legally and online-ly (uhm, through her blog, I mean) may be an indication that she's truly distressed & that the incident may have really happened....

This woman obviously thinks that the world owes her a living.

He gives her $48k but its ok, he touches her and she feels a "sausage-like object" and she's going to destroy him.

Ok. What's her name and where's her photo? Let's see who this lady is. She put her case before everybody, she had better be prepared to come out... and to be named and shamed.

Trackback from Help needed: I was molested by a friend while I was asleep (male version):

I like to read your blog everyday. This is something I must share with you. If you can, please post on your blog so others can learn from my mistake....

Trackback from Jean Got SGD48,000 And Molestered By John?:

He actually wooed her for 2 years - which she conveniently left out from her blog. He lent her SGD48,000 - which she also conveniently forgot (it was a gift, she says - to buy her a CAR)...

Hahaha.....now the $48K comes into the picture and it supposed to be a 'GIFT'. This Char Bor is freaking smart leh!

Trackback from Molested? You asked for it:

"All I want is an apology," she said....

KNN...

at first we all tot tat the char bor was stupid.

now.... got 48K involved.

pple might actually think its the guy tat is stupid instead. and the char bor is the shrewd one.

if cry molest/rape...... guy's name, age, occupation, pictures will all appear in newspaper even b4 going to trial. found innocent, have no form of recourse. suffer months of humiliation, depression, loss of job for nothing.

Where did John get his money? $48K is not a small amount.
Aircraft engineer earn that much? Income tax?
Reminder: He does own a car.Even if he moonlight at Manulife he had breach his term of employment with his Current Employer. But really, Where he get that amount of money?
And finally is there tax evasion?

It's not a real issue with this $48,000.
Think I'd blog about why later on.
Actually, the John is still at fault lah~

this kind of thing doesn't even deserved to be on tomorrow.sg , what are the editors doing? surely it's obvious this kind of crap ends up becoming a flaming weapon on that person involved.

Well this case didn't deserve to end up on The New Paper either but there is it, on yesterday's and today's edition.

Pity the lady, though not 100%. She should have tried her best to get a female friend or even a relative to go with her instead.

Harry: You realise of course that we can never be friends.

Sally: Why not?

Harry: What I'm saying is... and this is not a come-on in any way, shape or
form, is that men and women can't be friends because the sex part always gets
in the way.

Sally: That's not true, I have a number of men friends and there's is no sex
involved.

Harry: No you don't.

Sally: Yes I do.

Harry: No you don't.

Sally: Yes I do.

Harry: You only think you do.

Sally: You're saying I'm having sex with these men without my knowledge?

Harry: No, what I'm saying is they all want to have sex with you.

Sally: They do not.

Harry: Do too.

Sally: They do not.

Harry: Do too.

Sally: How do you know?

Harry: Because no man can be friends with a woman he finds attractive, he
always wants to have sex with her.

Sally: So you're saying that a man can be friends with a woman he finds
unattractive.

Harry: Nuh, you pretty much wanna nail'em too.

Sally: What if they don't want to have sex with you?

Harry: Doesn't matter, because the sex thing is already out there so the
friendship is ultimately doomed and that is the end of the story.

Sally: Well I guess we're not going to be friends then.

Harry: Guess not.

LOL

so funny yet so true.

this from When Harry Met Sally?

or isit from the movie When Harry Became Dictator of a Country. cos he wants to screw everyone too.

Hi. Reading the link provided, I believe this comes more under "outrage of modesty" but, unfortunately, there's indeed no extraterrestal jurisdiction to persecute the alleged crime. Try to see if the MSN conversations have been archived (on your laptop or your friend's) & thus saveable. Also enquire whether your friend can formally confirm his own confrontation with the offender via a proper authority (eg. a police report or statutory declaration). Send copies of both to the Koreans for their investigations. (Ultimately, though, they may not be able to do much unless the offender is willing to fly over & be interviewed for his side of the story, etc.) If you're still dogged, write a formal complaint to his local employer & include all the written evidence. Up to them to follow up too. Be aware of the legal implications, of course.

yeah! Girl not so bright. She can always ask for a spare bed from the hotel. She could afford to fly back to korea to lodge police record yet didn't even want to spend more money to change room or add a bed. Blogging about it only discloses further that she is isn't bright at all!

the event happened last year, so by now she would have saved up enough to fly there?

A Singaporean girl got molested overseas by another Singaporean guy only to find out that the Singapore police has no jurisdiction over what happens out of Singapore.

isn't this super obvious? even if a s'porean murdered someone overseas, he can't be prosecuted in the local courts, only in the country he committed the crime in. duh.

Why want to sleep with the guy on the same bed? Should sleep on the floor or sofa so as to prevent any misunderstanding mah. That girl is not so bright.

WT ???? file what report ? that she din know she gave come-on signs ? the police probably laughed their heads off when she reported this in Sg .. even if there were any circumstantial evidence, they are stacked AGAINST her ... the John guy should instead sue her for defamation and for inciting a witchhunt on the internet ..

It's very obvious she approached the wrong lawyer or the cheapest lawyer she can get. Actually, her case is probably too 'small' for the effort. But legally speaking, she can still take action. LOL~

Anyway, leading you on is not an excuse in outraging the modesty of women. It's about the same that you rape a woman claiming she is your wife. The nature is about the same.

"Why? She must have been ready for sex when she chose to marry me!"

But in Singapore laws, this is nosense. And while Singapore has no jurisdiction in Korea, but since they are both Singaporeans, Singapore does have a right in the protection of the rights of Singaporeans, especially when Korea and Singapore operate under the right of registered member states. This cannot be denied. It's about the same as crime in laws of seas. (Subsec B, art 27(2))

Ok, the point is pretty simple; the nature of this is already an offence on the side of the defendant. Sleeping on same bed is not an excuse for outraging a woman's modesty, even when you are the wife. Not to say, Jean is not even a girlfriend. If you are a girlfriend or wife, a defence will be interesting. But she is not, and John should be in trouble. And Singapore courts can deal with John. It doesn't matter if it happened in Korea becos the rights of Jean is with Jean, a Singaporean.

Say, gambling in open seas is ok, the gamblers are not against the rights of others, the activity is unregulated. But raping or killing or infrign on rights of others is not. Basically, because this rights thing of individual come under what? UN. Singapore is a member registered under UN charter, hence Singaporeans, including Jean and John. This part is about international laws. Art 16 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966: Everyone shall have the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law. Although this is not needed since this offence is understandable as violation of Jean's right, but it does help people understand they should have justice on this as well, not because it happens in Korea and nothing can be done.

The only problem comes is when it happens in 'cyberspace'. LOL~

Anyway, Universal Declaration Art3 and Art5 have already shown Jean that she should find a lawyer who really knows what to do. But of cos, Jean's concern is that John will deny what he did. But Jean must not forget, prosecution is all dependent on the Judge not always on the laws. The laws only provide a guideline or a base for the case. But justice is delivered based on the judge.

And, interesting, in global matters, many judges are ignorant or not that bothered on global laws unless the lawyers reminded them. It'd be hence funnier if the lawyers themselves in the first place only understand their own branch of laws. And if lawyers themselves can't be bothered about international laws, more so the common police. The police normally follows their local 'habits' or proceedures.

By right, you can't sue somebody for defamation on people's blogs, or online diaries. Especially when civic involvement is included in Singapore plus it's promoted by the ministers of cabinet on blogging. There is no legal basis at this point as Jean's complain/case involves no direct national interest (state interest). Legal profession nowadays in USA are also awakening on this point even for forum participation.

The inciting part is more on 'sedation' which is... come on, which lawyer tells you this is sedation? LOL~

Girls, if you think a guy has molested you, feel free to blog about it. You must first protect your own rights, your own bodies before you expect respect from others. It's the same as consumer rights. If every girl keeps quiet, what can anyone expect the government to do for you?

If Jean blogs about it, it becomes an internet matters, and John can also blog about it in returns; but if Jean wants her justice, she has to do something outside the internet since internet is after all virtual reality of little/no credibility; and a blog is still your online diary UNLESS you declare it as a formal news publication with public responsibility. You can't rise a Tan Ah Kow's diary to the status of online New York Times, and demote New York Times in that same manner.

The one thing that internet may help is when the police or authority takes note and do something about it (this is usually taken up as social feedback).

>>But in Singapore laws, this is nosense. And while Singapore has no jurisdiction in Korea, but since they are both Singaporeans, Singapore does have a right in the protection of the rights of Singaporeans, especially when Korea and Singapore operate under the right of registered member states. This cannot be denied. It's about the same as crime in laws of seas. (Subsec B, art 27(2))<<

Huh????

FINALLY, a comment that is fair and isn't insulting the poor girl.

That's the least that I can do for her.
I just can't stand women crying...
Hope she gets well.

It's quite true lah...

The girl can file against the guy in Korea, but not in the police station but the lower courts. If the courts take the case, they can get the police to get the culprit, provided you know the location of that culprit.

But do not think you can commit sizeable offence in other country cos... if you do so, for the country's face, they will still treat it as priority case, and there is such thing known as international police cooperation.

Ie. If you go and kill that fella in Korea, Korean police will catch you. If you fly back to Singapore, Singapore police will also catch you, then deport you to Korea.

Of cos, the girl can go and molest that guy back... an eye for an eye... LOL~

Say, if you get married to three bimbos in some islamic countries, your wife cannot report Singapore police to catch you. It may be an offence here, but it may be agreeable overseas. See?

Want many wives? Just go overseas marry again. However, some countries also recognise marriages elsewhere as the same in their countries... So no play play. :)