Welcome to the REACH Portal.

i-REACH (May 2013) is out now.

In This Section

Find us on

> >

A- | A+

Discussion Forum

18 Jun 2012, 7.59AM

16 comments & replies |by Guest | Other Hot Issues

I have been following the Woffles Wu case with interest and can only say I'm quite dissatisfied with both the Law Minister and AGC's response. It sounds like they tried to sweep it under the carpet but there was a persistent person who pushed it, and AGC would not even have bothered to prosecute if not for that person.

I still can't believe it has taken 6-7 years for this to be prosecuted and that the police are still investigating the speeding offence. What are they waiting for? A time travel machine? Do they take so much time for EVERY speeding offence? Is it going to take them 3 years for a parking ticket? Was it being delayed until a statute of limitations ran out? Is the AGC really impartial or were there special connections of Mr. Wu?

It seems that there are now separate laws for the well-connected and rich in Singapore, who can already hire expensive lawyers to help defend them. Is this what Singapore has come down to?

715 views | 16 comments & replies |

Sort By :

Guest

18 Jun 2012, 8.09AM

It is very simple to check.

Just get the CID to raid Dr Woffles Wu's clinic for his patient records, to see if any of the Legal councils are patients of his.

Guest

18 Jun 2012, 2.17PM

But what if CID also patients of his? Then how? CNB Chief can kelong, I don't see why CID cannot kelong.

Guest

18 Jun 2012, 2.51PM

Hey thanks for your timely note and reminder. I forgot lah.

CID guys are so ugly, I just could not imagine they are also clients of Dr Wu.

In fact all the Government guys are ugly, so infact they should ALL be clients of Dr Wu?!

Then WHO should raid the clinic of Dr Wu?!

Wow, what a quandary?!

(Guru)

No.kidding!

18 Jun 2012, 8.27AM

I hope to get an answer as to why this particular case requires 5 to 6 years to go to court ?

Guest

18 Jun 2012, 8.38AM

Someone will give it an excuse.

"Backlog".

Guest

19 Jun 2012, 10.44AM

No need any answer.

Woffles Wu has been fined $1000 for TWO offences.

AGC issue statement saying offences were made prior to enactment of 2008 penal code, so $1000 for TWO offences is ok.

Case has been swept under the carpet already, you all just don't know it yet.

Police investigations still going on, but fine issued. GAME OVER.

Woffles Wu: Lololol, tell 80 year old ah pek go take the rap in the end only fine $1000, aiyah what is $1000. That's why it's good to be rich and famous, I pity those poor people lololol.

Guest

19 Jun 2012, 1.51PM

"That's why it's good to be rich and famous,.."

NO, NOT REALLY!....

NOT if they have no integrity and honesty whatsoever.

NOT when or if they got rich and amassed wealth through illegal means, money laundering, cheating, lying, stealing and ursurping another's property(ies) and wealth..etc.

Would one respect those kind....those deceiving so-called 'wealthy' people??

Never be blinded by money.

Guest

18 Jun 2012, 6.35PM

NEVER MIND, LAH....good for us.

ok lah! .. if this happens to us, we can all point to>>>" ay, that Wu fella gets $1000 fine, same goes for us !"

Remember, "If Yan can cook, so can you.
" If Wu can do it, so can you ! "

Guest

20 Jun 2012, 9.58AM

The fact that both the Minister and the AGC are defending the sentence shows they are in cohoot, don't they? The AGC is supposed to appeal against the light sentence while the Minister is supposed to stand for the independence of the judiciary. Why are they doing the same thing here?

Fat MaMa

Guest

20 Jun 2012, 10.57AM

I scratch your back you scratch mine.

Guest

18 Jun 2012, 9.50AM

The sales executive was not a man of any social standing and neither was he was rich as compared to Dr. Wolf Wolf. You see the difference? This is the only difference and there was NO difference in the event.
All men are NOT made equal.Some are MORE than equal.

Guest

18 Jun 2012, 9.59AM

So much for the pledge.........justice and equality?

As I have mentioned, I was also filing a private case before the Magistrate, and what I faced was an INTIMIDATION from him, not a "fair" hearing!

Guest

19 Jun 2012, 1.47PM

Is that so, no fair hearing. NOT good.... NOT good at all if words get around, y'know.

Guest

19 Jun 2012, 2.06PM

Yes the poor face the INTIMIDATION, the rich get their cases read on the RED CARPET, and then even swept under the carpet?!

Guest

19 Jun 2012, 6.56PM

..yeah, those slime scums!

(Newbie)

TKC

21 Jun 2012, 4.35PM

It is innocent until proven guilty!

pls take the emotion aside. according to what have been explained, the fact has been given: the case only came to light recently because of a complaint which were referred to AGC. And AGC acted according to the law/regulation in the year of offence. just ask yourself, is it fair to charge someone based on the most recent law/penal codes when the offence was committed years ago? and picture that if it is U who is charged, say u park at a place which only have double yellow lines, now the place has changed to double yellow zigzag line. last time maybe just fined and that all. but now, the fined is heavier with demerit points. what will u think if u were charged based on new ruling?

oso, U cannot just said because Dr is rich and he may hv special treatment. Dr is rich because he work hard and smart for it. pls do not be emotional .....