New case of sexual misconduct surfaced in the best University in Asia.
Here are some interesting details and reactions from some bloggers.
25 cases involving sexual misconduct in NUS from 2015-2018 and how they were dealt with.
The National University of Singapore (NUS) voyeurism saga is not all that uncommon.
Three PDF documents detailing a comprehensive list of offences from 2015 to 2018 shines light on the consideration given in the cases, and the penalties meted out.
In one case, a NUS student entered a children’s toilet and filmed children in the adjacent cubicle on multiple occasions.
Interestingly, if the victims involved male students, it is less likely that police reports will be made.
Here are the cases that involve insult and/or outrage of modesty.
https://observer.news/featured/25-cases-involving-insult-and-outrage-of-modesty-cases-in-nus-from-2015-2018/
--------------------------------------------------
NUS undergraduate Ms Monica Baey was filmed showering in the hostel by a fellow student from the Faculty of Engineering. She lodged a police report and was told the pervert was only given a conditional warning instead of being charged in court. Past offenders of similar offences were typically given jail sentences.
Ms Baey said she tried to appeal for a heavier sentence, but was told by the investigating officer "You just have to accept the outcome" or "go to NUS and push for action".
We urged the Singapore police and AGC to apply the law fairly and equally to all by reopening the case and charge the pervert in court! Let a judge decide the appropriate punishment to be meted out!
We need to do more to protect our girls from such perverts! Such inaction is unacceptable and will only encourage more perverts to commit such crimes! It will also set an unhealthy precedent for future cases!
--------------------------------------------------
Monica exposed Nicholas in social media....
Actions by NUSSU exco after her complaint and exposing the crime.
Nicholas caught caressing another girl's thigh.
---------------------------------------------------
SPF issues statement on Nicholas Lim
There have been public discussions regarding the 12-month conditional warning given to a 23-year-old male National University of Singapore (NUS) undergraduate who had committed criminal trespass and insulted the modesty of a female undergraduate at the NUS.
There are two factors (which are both inter-related and yet separate): the first relates to rules to ensure that premises like NUS provide a safe environment, and the second relates to criminal prosecution. On the first, Police understand that NUS is reviewing its rules, on how such conduct is to be treated.
On the second issue: Police and AGC understand public concerns, on ensuring that our laws and enforcement provide sufficient protection for potential victims, and sufficient deterrence against would-be offenders. That is the approach that Police and AGC take.
In deciding whether to recommend prosecution for a criminal offence, a number of factors are considered by Police in each case, including the age of the accused, the likelihood of reoffending/rehabilitation, the extent of remorse shown, whether there are aggravating factors (for example, like circulation of the offending images).
In this case, the accused was assessed to have a high likelihood of rehabilitation, and was remorseful. There were also additional factors relating to his conduct which were relevant, such as the absence of other obscene materials in any of his devices.
A prosecution, with a possible jail sentence, will, likely ruin his entire future, with a permanent criminal record. Taking into account these factors, he was given a conditional warning, which means that if he commits any other criminal offence within 12 months, he will be liable to be prosecuted for both this current offence and the subsequent other offence. He will then likely face a jail sentence.
Our criminal justice system seeks to temper punishment and deterrence, with giving offenders a second chance to reform, based on assessment of the relevant factors.
The approach in this case is consistent with the approach taken in other cases. There have been a number of similar cases, where such conditional warnings have been given.
Where other relevant factors are involved, for example, a prior criminal record, premeditation to evade detection, there will often be a prosecution.
Allegations that the man was not prosecuted because he has influential parents are untrue - the Police and AGC did not consider his parents' background. Such factors are irrelevant considerations. It is unfortunate that such untruths have been put out. The man’s parents have agreed for it to be disclosed that his father is a driver in the public transport sector and his mother is a housewife.
The Police are also aware of comparisons being made between this case and a 2015 case involving a 23-year-old man who was charged and sentenced to 10 weeks’ imprisonment for filming a woman showering at Republic Polytechnic (RP).
The accused in the RP case had committed multiple criminal trespass offences, taken deliberate action to avoid detection by covering up the CCTVs in the vicinity and covering his face with a towel, and did not own up voluntarily but was arrested following Police investigations to track him down.
He was a former student of RP and had committed the offences over a period of four months. As such, the Police, in consultation with the AGC, prosecuted him in court. The facts in that case are quite different.
------------------
The system has to be fair and just to Nicholas too
The system has to be fair and just, it can't be the more vocal ones get disproportionately more say over the rest...
So the current punishment meted out to Nicholas is based on precedent cases and through the board of discipline ...
NUS did no wrong as this system has been practiced all along. To single out Nicholas for special treatment is manifestly unjust...
The National University of Singapore (NUS) on Monday (April 22) said it has a "second strike and you are out" policy for sexual misconduct cases.
Setting out how the university handles such cases, NUS vice-provost (student life) Florence Ling told The Straits Times that a student found guilty of sexual misconduct for a second time will be expelled.
"For first-time offenders, because we are an educational institution, we want to give the students a chance. Student offenders who appear before the Board of Discipline for the first time are given a range of punishments, but not immediate expulsion," she said.
----------------------------
Here are some interesting details and reactions from some bloggers.
--------------------------------------------------
25 cases involving sexual misconduct in NUS from 2015-2018 and how they were dealt with.
The National University of Singapore (NUS) voyeurism saga is not all that uncommon.
Three PDF documents detailing a comprehensive list of offences from 2015 to 2018 shines light on the consideration given in the cases, and the penalties meted out.
In one case, a NUS student entered a children’s toilet and filmed children in the adjacent cubicle on multiple occasions.
Interestingly, if the victims involved male students, it is less likely that police reports will be made.
Here are the cases that involve insult and/or outrage of modesty.
https://observer.news/featured/25-cases-involving-insult-and-outrage-of-modesty-cases-in-nus-from-2015-2018/
--------------------------------------------------
NUS undergraduate Ms Monica Baey was filmed showering in the hostel by a fellow student from the Faculty of Engineering. She lodged a police report and was told the pervert was only given a conditional warning instead of being charged in court. Past offenders of similar offences were typically given jail sentences.
Ms Baey said she tried to appeal for a heavier sentence, but was told by the investigating officer "You just have to accept the outcome" or "go to NUS and push for action".
We urged the Singapore police and AGC to apply the law fairly and equally to all by reopening the case and charge the pervert in court! Let a judge decide the appropriate punishment to be meted out!
We need to do more to protect our girls from such perverts! Such inaction is unacceptable and will only encourage more perverts to commit such crimes! It will also set an unhealthy precedent for future cases!
--------------------------------------------------
Monica exposed Nicholas in social media....
Letter of Apology.
SINGAPORE — Education Minister Ong Ye Kung has expressed his concerns to the National University of Singapore (NUS) over the “manifestly inadequate” penalties that it has imposed in the recent sexual misconduct case.
Ong said in a post on his Facebook page on Monday (22 April) that he spoke to the NUS President and Board Chairman about the case on Saturday night.
“From here on, for offences that affect the safety of students on campus, we have to take a tough stand, and send a strong signal to everyone. Two strikes and you are out cannot be the standard application. NUS has to make its campus safe for all students, especially female students,” Ong said.
Ong did not specify the details of the case in his post. His comments come amid the furore over the conduct of a male NUS student who was caught on camera filming female undergraduate Monica Baey showering in a hostel toilet. Many NUS students and others have slammed the light punishments meted out to the offender.
The NUS Board of Discipline had ordered the male student to be suspended for one semester, banned from entering into housing premises on campus, undergo counselling, write a letter of apology, among other punishments.
The first-time offender was also given a 12-month conditional warning by the police. If the student were to commit an offence over the following 12 months after the warning, he would be prosecuted for both offences.
Ong said NUS will review its discipline and sentencing framework “swiftly and decisively”.
He added, “I am confident NUS’ review will result in a more robust process and stricter framework. The NUS Board and President are seized with this matter, and are determined to put a stop to such unacceptable behaviour on campus.”
The minister said he has also asked other universities to review their frameworks for similar offences.
Raging controversy over NUS incident
The incident has sparked many debates and widespread concerns over sexual harassment in university campuses in Singapore.
Earlier Monday, NUS said it will hold a town hall meeting this week to address concerns over the controversy.
“The University has heard your concerns. We are holding a town hall this week for NUS students, faculty and staff to gather feedback and concerns about sexual misconduct on campus and to discuss how the University can further strengthen its disciplinary and support frameworks,” NUS said in a post on its Facebook page.
On Sunday, almost 500 NUS students – with support from 194 students from other local universities and educational institutions – wrote a letter to the top management of NUS, urging them to take immediate steps to tackle sexual harassment on campus.
In their statement, the students wrote that the punishments given to the offender signalled that NUS “does not credibly enforce its stance against sexual voyeurism as a serious offence” and that “those who commit such an offence can arguably expect to receive a relatively light sentence”.
The controversy went viral online after Baey expressed anger over what she perceived to be light punishments imposed on the male student in several Instagram posts.
On Monday, Great Eastern said an NUS student has resigned from the company after it has suspended him for misconduct.
“We are aware of the recent incident involving Nicholas Lim, a Great Eastern financial representative. He has been placed on immediate suspension and has since submitted his resignation,” Great Eastern said in a post on its Facebook page.
“Great Eastern strongly disapproves of any inappropriate misconduct by our financial representatives and will not hesitate to take the necessary action,” it added.
SPF issues statement on Nicholas Lim
There have been public discussions regarding the 12-month conditional warning given to a 23-year-old male National University of Singapore (NUS) undergraduate who had committed criminal trespass and insulted the modesty of a female undergraduate at the NUS.
There are two factors (which are both inter-related and yet separate): the first relates to rules to ensure that premises like NUS provide a safe environment, and the second relates to criminal prosecution. On the first, Police understand that NUS is reviewing its rules, on how such conduct is to be treated.
On the second issue: Police and AGC understand public concerns, on ensuring that our laws and enforcement provide sufficient protection for potential victims, and sufficient deterrence against would-be offenders. That is the approach that Police and AGC take.
In deciding whether to recommend prosecution for a criminal offence, a number of factors are considered by Police in each case, including the age of the accused, the likelihood of reoffending/rehabilitation, the extent of remorse shown, whether there are aggravating factors (for example, like circulation of the offending images).
In this case, the accused was assessed to have a high likelihood of rehabilitation, and was remorseful. There were also additional factors relating to his conduct which were relevant, such as the absence of other obscene materials in any of his devices.
A prosecution, with a possible jail sentence, will, likely ruin his entire future, with a permanent criminal record. Taking into account these factors, he was given a conditional warning, which means that if he commits any other criminal offence within 12 months, he will be liable to be prosecuted for both this current offence and the subsequent other offence. He will then likely face a jail sentence.
Our criminal justice system seeks to temper punishment and deterrence, with giving offenders a second chance to reform, based on assessment of the relevant factors.
The approach in this case is consistent with the approach taken in other cases. There have been a number of similar cases, where such conditional warnings have been given.
Where other relevant factors are involved, for example, a prior criminal record, premeditation to evade detection, there will often be a prosecution.
Allegations that the man was not prosecuted because he has influential parents are untrue - the Police and AGC did not consider his parents' background. Such factors are irrelevant considerations. It is unfortunate that such untruths have been put out. The man’s parents have agreed for it to be disclosed that his father is a driver in the public transport sector and his mother is a housewife.
The Police are also aware of comparisons being made between this case and a 2015 case involving a 23-year-old man who was charged and sentenced to 10 weeks’ imprisonment for filming a woman showering at Republic Polytechnic (RP).
The accused in the RP case had committed multiple criminal trespass offences, taken deliberate action to avoid detection by covering up the CCTVs in the vicinity and covering his face with a towel, and did not own up voluntarily but was arrested following Police investigations to track him down.
He was a former student of RP and had committed the offences over a period of four months. As such, the Police, in consultation with the AGC, prosecuted him in court. The facts in that case are quite different.
------------------
The system has to be fair and just to Nicholas too
The system has to be fair and just, it can't be the more vocal ones get disproportionately more say over the rest...
So the current punishment meted out to Nicholas is based on precedent cases and through the board of discipline ...
NUS did no wrong as this system has been practiced all along. To single out Nicholas for special treatment is manifestly unjust...
The National University of Singapore (NUS) on Monday (April 22) said it has a "second strike and you are out" policy for sexual misconduct cases.
Setting out how the university handles such cases, NUS vice-provost (student life) Florence Ling told The Straits Times that a student found guilty of sexual misconduct for a second time will be expelled.
"For first-time offenders, because we are an educational institution, we want to give the students a chance. Student offenders who appear before the Board of Discipline for the first time are given a range of punishments, but not immediate expulsion," she said.
----------------------------
Corporate Reaction to NUS
SINGAPORE — The fallout over the National University of Singapore's (NUS) handling of a peeping tom incident has widened, with a company declaring that it will cease all dealings with the university while the mother of the victim lashed out at NUS for letting the perpetrator off "so lightly".
Meanwhile, almost 500 students put up a statement addressed to NUS' senior management, including president Tan Eng Chye, provost Ho Teck Hua and dean Peter Pang, calling on the university to take a "stronger stance against sexual harassment and set a positive example for other universities around the world".
The victim, 23-year-old NUS undergraduate Monica Baey, had taken to Instagram to publicise an incident in which she was filmed by a fellow student while she was showering in her hostel bathroom at NUS' Eusoff Hall last November.
She said that the police handed the perpetrator a 12-month conditional warning, while NUS got him to write a letter of apology to her, suspended him for a semester, barred him from entering halls and residences, and made him attend counselling.
She said in her posts that she wanted “real consequences for perpetrators that commit such acts”.
On Sunday (April 21), OnHand Agrarian, an urban farm that has taken in NUS students for internships, said in a Facebook post that it has made "the monumentally stupid decision" to compromise its product and clients by "allowing a criminal" to continue to use its facilities.
Therefore, the company said that it will "suspend all dealings" with NUS until the perpetrator is expelled.
"No talks, no internships, no site visits, no use of our company when you need industry partners to be Co-PIs (co-Principal Investigator) for government grant submissions," it said.
NUS had said on Saturday that it will set up a committee to review its current disciplinary and support frameworks.
The executive committee of the NUS' students’ union then said in a statement on Sunday that it condemns any form of sexual harassment at the institution, but urged fellow students not to harass the perpetrator.
Ms Baey herself was one of 489 signatories in a statement addressed to the NUS' heads on Sunday, expressing deep concerns about the university’s "approach towards sexual harassment".
The statement said: "While we understand the University’s need to maintain a balanced position on the matter and to keep in line with precedence, we find the punishment meted out in this case problematic because it signals to the NUS community at large that i) our University does not credibly enforce its stance against sexual voyeurism as a serious offence; ii) those who commit such an offence can arguably expect to receive a relatively light sentence; and iii) survivors of sexual violence and harassment will not receive adequate institutional and social support even if they voice their concerns to the relevant authorities."
The group of signatories made four recommendations, including suggesting that NUS make a "stronger statement against sexual harassment on campus" than the one dean Pang had issued, and publicly committing to a "zero-tolerance policy against sexual harassment".
"As one of the world’s top universities, we hope that NUS would take a stronger stance against sexual harassment and set a positive example for other universities around the world," the statement said.
Meanwhile, the victim's mother has called the 12-month conditional warning issued by the police to the perpetrator as "completely ridiculous".
"What this means is, the police are giving him a slap on his hand and say don't do it again within 12 months," Mrs Mary Baey commented on Facebook.
"How can we know this is not going to happen again and how can there be no serious consequences for such action?"
She also criticised NUS for letting the peeping tom off "so lightly with an absurd and pathetic apology, and a suspension of a semester", describing the punishment meted out as "completely unacceptable".
"I was given to understand that this is not the first case, there have been many cases, some reported to NUS and some that went unreported," Mrs Baey said.
"How can we place our trust in NUS, a national and international institution? This trust is now broken."
-------------------------
Another case....exposed.
--------------------------
Someone defending Nicholas...
--------------------------
