Reality is the nightmare that dreams pretend to be.
My head was full of homicide and s. 300(c) of the Penal Code when I went to bed this morning at around 3 a.m. It's also quite scary that it was the first time I knew what the whole fuss over 300(c) was over, apart from how even the subjective interpretation of the provision is incongruous with the traditional paradigm of the definition of 'murder' (this last part is my own opinion).
What was also painfully stupid was that when I was writing out my own notes to take into the exam hall and writing brief summaries of the cases, I referred to the High Court judgment of Public Prosecutor v. Lim Poh Lye instead of the Court of Appeal one. And there I was, wondering why the students who presented the case said that it adopted a heavily objective interpretation of 300(c) when the judgment obviously said otherwise. I saw some glimmer of hope amongst the murk that is this country's justice system when I read my reading list and saw that MH referred to Lim Poh Lye as the 'most important' 300(c) case in recent history, because to me, it was like...wow, can it possibly be? A sensible, humane judgment?!
Of course, I was painfully wrong. Reading the CA judgment (okay, bits and pieces of it) snatched that faint glimmer from me and all was plunged into darkness again.
Right, I exaggerate, but I still think it's ridiculous that you don't even need to have an intention to inflict the actual fatal injury to be convicted of murder. I mean, if you intended to inflict some sort of injury to stop your victim from shouting or escaping when you're robbing said victim, and you accidentally severed some major artery that runs through the victim's leg that eventually caused the victim to die, you're still convicted for murder even if you have absolutely no idea that there is such a major artery in the leg (like who would know such things anyway, besides medical students and law people who read Lim Poh Lye?) and therefore did not intend to cause fatal injury to the victim. So I suppose it all boils down to luck which will eventually decide if you will live or die. It's sad.
And it's so wrong.
Not to mention some degree of 'manifestly unjust'.
Anyway, I'm supposed to be studying now and I don't know why I'm writing this entry. But I don't understand the difference between s. 299 culpable homicide not amounting to murder and s. 300 murder. The first limb of s. 299 requires an intention to cause death, doesn't it? If there's an intention to cause death isn't it already murder? I'm confused.
Also, listening to Jielun's debut album is pure joy. That was before he was the Chinese world's most wanted property, before the commercial endorsements and songs written for Pepsi. Even a live performance of Ke Ai Nu Ren at Jordan Chan's concert exudes the enthusiasm, raw talent and passion for music that doesn't quite resurface in his newer albums anymore.
Interestingly enough, I don't like Fantasy the way most people do. I actually think the debut is better than Fantasy (which is like his breakthrough album), as is his third album. But whatever it is, November's Chopin is his absolute worst, no question.
And whatever it is, I still love his music. I think I will always love his music. I wish I could explain it but I can't. He sticks out like a sore thumb amongst my alternative/rock CDs and people think it's strange that I claim to like alternative/rock when they find out that I'm a huge Jielun fan, but yeah, whatever. Some things do not need an explanation.
And I certainly do not need to waste any more time.
Back to trying to decipher culpable homicide not amounting to murder, et. al.