Originally posted by Atobe:Thank you for your correction.
Did you miss out on my quote from Prof S. Jayakumar, which I posted on 29 Aug '09 4.00PM - Page 2 of this thread ?
For your benefit I will repeat it here:
How did you refer him as a "lad" in your reply at 12.51PM of this date ?
Obviously, from his boyish face had been noticed by you.
The fact that he was stupid enough with his judgment that landed him into hot soup clearly showed that Prof S. Jayakumar was correct - that adulthood could not possibly arrived into the mind of this "lad" just because he passed a fixed birthday.
There is no dispute to your observation, and you are correct with your views that he should be separated from violent criminals - so that the longer term social cost to Singapore will be looked into now.
Can anyone insulate him permanently ?
The least we can do for ourselves is to ensure that while in prison, this "lad" should not come under any influence from the more mature criminals.
'Lad', as I use it, is just another term for 'guy'. In typical British usage it makes no reference to age or maturity. The justice system has its limits, and giving everyone full rights, privileges and responsibilities at 21 is as fair as it can go anywhere in the world. Naive mistakes and crimes can be committed at any age after that and they have to be paid for equally. Segregation or no segregation, a sentence that is much more severe than that which his local accomplices receive must be upheld nevertheless.
You make a mistake, you pay for it. No question about that.
The question here is the punishment meted out.