Friday, August 25, 2006

Attorney-General's Chambers

Some people have written it to ask what they should do about the sentencing for the Old Airport Road abuser. Write in to the Attorney-General's Chambers and tell them how you feel about this case :-

Address : 1 Coleman Street, #10-00, Singapore 179803

Tel : 63361411
Fax : 63325984
Internet Website :
Email Address :

As always, please be calm, polite and reasonable. We're also preparing to write to them on this matter.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have just sent this in.


1 Coleman Street, #10-00, Singapore 179803

Dear Sir,

I write to express my deepest concern re the relatively short sentence the ‘cat torturer/killer ’ was given.


Foremost in my mind is the message we are giving to the public: that torturing of animals is ‘not a big deal’ in Singapore and that people can get away with very light sentences. This will encourage those who dislike animals to do whatever they like. There have been several such cases in Singapore already- highlighted in our press. If an example is not made here, the cases will increase.


Singapore is hoping to be a ‘world-class’ country. We are upgrading everything and bringing it to a certain standard.
How we treat animals in our country is a reflection of the kind of people we are.

The sentence gives a rather poor reflection of us as a nation. Can we say we are ‘first world’ in our attitudes ?


The man tortured the cat for a long time. He deliberately inflicted pain over and over again. Its not an isolated case. Members of the public took trouble in nabbing this man. Town council was involved as well.

If the sentence is barely a slap on the wrist, it is saying to the public and to the town councils :”Don’t bother banding together to do community projects like these for the sake of justice. No one will listen nor care.”

This will not only cause great disappointment, it will increase a sense of outrage which might lead to great apathy and distrust regarding the courts’ ability to dispense true justice.

I therefore respectfully appeal for the sentence to be reviewed and greatly increased.

Thank you.

Dr ....

25/8/06 2:27 PM  
Anonymous kev said...

Here's my take.

Dear Sir,
I wish to impress upon you my disappointment at the short sentence that the animal abuser received. If the abuse was a result of personal psychological problems then he should be treated for them. If the court decides to mete out punishment then it should reflect the severity of the crime. I am even more concerned that it was noted in court that the abuser might abuse people as well. The abuser was organised as shown by his modus operandi and deliberately chose deserted places for his crime. This made it harder for culprit to be caught. It took the cooperation of several citizens (and the town council) in a show of solidarity who volunteered time, money and effort, to finally nab the culprit. A light sentence would 1) not deter future offenders and 2) discourage citizen patrols and active participation in the community as stakeholders. Therefore I implore you to reconsider the sentence.

Yours Respectfully,

28/8/06 6:07 PM  
Blogger Dawn said...

Thanks for sharing everyone!

28/8/06 6:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

An excerpt from my letter:

With due respect to the courts, the sentence that was passed extenuated the gravity of this man’s crime. I believe this sentiment is shared by the SPCA, Cat Welfare Society and many other members of the public, especially those who have invested their time, effort and money to nab this ‘cat killer’.

As Mahatma Gandhi once said, “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated”. Taking such acts of cruelty to animals lightly will in turn send out the wrong message to people that a heinous crime like this is tolerated in our society. The consequence will be a moral decline in our people which will most definitely encumber Singapore’s progress towards becoming a ‘world class’ nation.


29/8/06 12:02 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home