Tuesday, October 30, 2007

"It is understood that the wealthy are able to afford the stipend of the best lawyers, and the latter, by definition, are the best at what they do -- defending their clients. So in a way, it puts the wealthy at an advantage during a lawsuit. Do you think it's fair that money plays a part in the outcome of a lawsuit?"
That was the first academic related question asked by Dr. Bowkett. Have to admit that I was totally stymied momentarily, hence my blabbering of something totally incongruous about the jury system, which eventually led to the subsequent discussion on the pros and cons of a jury system. I went on to say that because a panel of jury can be essentially made up of people from all vocations and walks of life, there may be times where lawyers and police officers sit among the panel. In this scenario, the lawyer may by default become an "in-built" leader due to his relevant specialist knowledge, and consequently, the eventual verdict could be swayed in the direction of his biases, prejudices as well as idiosyncracies. Similarly, a police officer may also prefer to believe evidence given by a fellow officer as opposed to one given by a drug addict. However, it can be argued that prejudices exist for each and every individual juror. A shopkeeper who's had his shop burgled and a car owner who's had his car vandalised before may have prejudiced opinions of burglars and vandals respectively. It is also often assumed that in a panel of 12 jurors, any prejudices are eventually neutralised as the real possibility of one juror being biased doesn't mean that there isn't a real possibility of a verdict being impartial. Then i went on to add that in the context of Singapore, probably Mr Lee Kuan Yew was more inclined towards the disadvantages of a Trial by Jury system, which is why the Singapore legal system does not have Trial by Jury. I went on to elaborate. In an interview with BBC back in 1977, Mr Lee recounted that after graduating from, incidentally, Cambridge University with a law degree, his first task as a young lawyer was to defend 3 Muslim men who killed an Royal Air Force officer, his wife as well as child. Back then, the Muslims and whites were on acrimonious terms because of the Maria Hertog incident and there was widespread racial riots. Innocent white men were killed for reason of guilty-by-association. So like what most advocates would have done, Mr Lee attacked the weaknesses of the jury, which was mainly made up of local commoners, that of prejudices, biases, their reluctance to convict 3 Muslim men who had killed in the moment of heated passion, religious passion, an RAF officer, his wife and his child. The 3 men were acquitted and the judge was absolutely disgusted. Although Mr Lee had discharged his duty of defending the 3 men, he felt a moral compunction in the sense that true justice had not been served. So he concluded that in any government in which he had a say in, he would not allow, in his own words, the "foolish and completely incongruous system" of Trial by Jury.
After that entire melodramatic soapopera of a story, Dr. Bowkett went on to ask whether I would want to be a judge if i were ever given a chance to be one in future. My reply was no, because being a judge comes with a moral obligation to uphold justice as well as be answerable to the general public in terms of the verdict. Nonetheless, justice does not always prevail in the real world, and sometimes, this is not within the control as certain things like the doctrine of precedent or a jury majority governs a judge's verdict. So i would not want to have to deal with such moral obligation, at least not in the foreseeable future.
Last part was mostly administrative, asking about my plans if I got into Cambridge and whether I had any questions for them etc.
Well, obviously I did not articulate my views as eloquenty as I have just penned, nerve wrecking you know, but content's roughly that. On the overall, I would say that I did ok..not outstanding, nor was it one to forget. So I can only wait and hope right now. If I get in, great, thank you and see you in October, but if I don't, no point crying over spilled milk, I can only say that I simply ain't good enough.

Actually, on second thoughts, I think I'd be dejected! Only consolence would be that I applied to Downing College. Downing's almost impossible when it comes to getting in.

7:59 PM - You left Gucci for Giordano, darling.

Sunday, October 21, 2007

glaciers melting in the dead of night and the superstars sucked into the supermassive.

dissolved.devoured.departed.

4:39 PM - You left Gucci for Giordano, darling.

Friday, October 12, 2007

30th Oct, Cambridge University Interview at Raffles JC. If all goes well, I'm gone.

2:17 PM - You left Gucci for Giordano, darling.

about

Brandon T.

from Tao Nan, to Dunman High, to Temasek JC.
What's next? Cambridge the Lexus or NUS the Olive tree?
I love soccer, and life gets pretty interesting when you worship 11 men and love 1 woman.
And I'm still waiting..for you.

If you be my star I'll be your sky you can hide underneath me and come out at night I'll turn jet black and live in your shadows while you show off your light I live to let you shine

links

tagboard

Taggie

credits

This layout was done by nette, with the help of Brushes from 100X100 and the Codes from kriss.Finally, the lovely image was taken from: deviantart. Pls do not take out the credits.