Almost no credit is given in cyberspace that the judge iseems to be trying her best to uphold the law while looking after the long term welfare of Amos.
Below are two posts from Facebook that explain what the judge seems to be doing.
But let’s be very clear: the reformative training suitability report says that he is physically and mentally suitable for reformative training, even if he is autistic. Juz being autistic doesn’t give anyone the right to break the law and evade responsibility.
Actually I see a judge desperately trying not to give Amos a record. When he flaunted bail conditions he tied her hands. She’s in a really difficult place. To let him go free is setting a precedence for others to disregard rules as well. That’s why I wished ay could have just taken a step back lose the battle for now and wait it out. Then again he’s a recalcitrant teenager! Not sure whether he may also have some psychological issues. A good test is not harmful especially if it can save him some unnecessary trauma. The first step of charging him was wrong. It just spiralled downwards and AY certainly did not help himself. A real tragedy!
And here’s what someone who I personally know and who works with autistic kids says in the same thread. In addition to talking about the judge, he also gives an explanation of the mandatory treatment order (MTO) that the judge is exploring.
The MTO is a relatively new sentencing option iwhich requires an offender suffering from psychiatric conditions to undergo treatment in lieu of imprisonment.
If offender completes treatment successfully, he/she will be cleared of conviction.
Prior to this sentencing option being made available to judges, people with mental disorders were imprisoned. We can just do a google search for people with very low IQ who were sentenced to time in prison for offences such as outrage of modesty before this sentencing option was made available. Some people with mental conditions like intellectual disability, may not understand what offence they may have caused.
In that sense, I appreciate the new sentencing option.[Err let’s give the Pet minister who also happens to be the law minister credit for this. And the PAP administration too.]
Just like intellectual disability, ASD is also on the Diagnostic & Statistical Manual IV.
Only a qualified person can diagnose where in the Spectrum a person diagnosed with ASD is (Asperger’s or whatever). I am not qualified, so I will not speculate.
IMO, the judge may be bending over backwards not to leave him with a criminal record – which is good as Amos is only a young boy.
I am not sure if MTO mandates institutional care once the diagnosis has been made, or if the ‘offender’ can commit to a term of outpatient care.
I personally feel that Amos should not be institutionalised.
On the last sentence, it takes two to tango and two hands to clap.
The “yaya papapaya”, that is Amos, had spat on the offer of probation that the state had preferred and which his lawyer and his doting mother Mary advised him to accept. And he has reposted the offending material, and posted nasty comments about the judge. And he had earlier broken his bail conditions. All these and the false allegation that his bailor had molested him and his flip floppng on an apology to the bailor make him a one-boy clear and present danger to other S’poreans, who is unlikely to be prepared to undergo outpatient treatment.
Best if he’s locked up until he responds to treatment if he can be treated.
If not bring on the Reformative Training Centre, a heavily structured programme for young offenders involving military-style training as well as counselling, which can last up to 30 months.
And do remember, the reformative training suitability report says that he is physically and mentally suitable for reformative training, even if he is autistic. Juz being autistic doesn’t give anyone the right to break the law and evade responsibility.