Laws of our land Part III(a): Matters sub-judice

The New Paper: Sim­ply electric!

Lordy, this mat­ter has con­sumed me. But before I go fur­ther, there’s one thing that I have to be mind­ful of when dis­cussing the case.

Chan­nel­news Asia called the other night to tell me that the names of the offend­ing web­sites had been taken down from their news arti­cle. I said, ‘orh, ok, what’s that gotta do wif me?‘

Then an ST reporter called to ask me some ques­tions, and said that they had been informed by their man­age­ment that some of the things they talked about in yesterday’s news­pa­per report shouldn’t have been talked about because they were sub­judeese. I said, ‘har’? He said, ‘sub­judeese, you know, when some­thing is part of a court case, you can­not talk about it, in case the judge decides to throw the poor bug­gers in jail just because he’s been influenced?’

I say, ‘Orh. Yah, I knew that’.

So, folks, don’t talk about the things about the case that are sub judice, ok? Which things? I can’t tell you. Because they are sub judice.

Nabeh, you say! What kind of cocka­mamie expla­na­tion is that? Well, I say what is what, and you take it as is or else I’ll func­tus your offi­cio and nudum your pactum!

(After the case is over, depend­ing on the sit­u­a­tion, we may not be able argue over the mer­its either, because by then, the mat­ter may have been res judi­cata, but that’s another story).

iTunes is playing an illegal copy of Lady Madonna from the album "Anthology 2 - Disc 2" by Bea­t­les of which I have the orig­i­nal CD.

Tech­no­rati Tags: blog, sedition, Sin­ga­pore