This article was first published on 7 September 2014 in the Singapore Mandarin broadsheet, Lianhe Zaobao.
Face-to-Face
“Talks fast, walks fast, handles things fast”. These words could be used to describe the working style of retired Supreme Court Judge, Lai Siu Chiu, 65.
She was appointed as a Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court in 1991, the first female to hold the post and also the youngest at the time.
Three years later, she made history again by becoming the first female Supreme Court Justice in Singapore.
Before her retirement at the end of October last year, Lai Siu Chiu contributed a song at a charity concert held in conjunction with the 25th anniversary of the Singapore Academy of Law.
She has continued to contribute to the nation after shedding her judge’s robes, while keeping a low profile. Starting from the middle of this month, she will take up an appointment as a member of the Presidential Council for Religious Harmony for a term of three years.
This petite 40-year law veteran sits for a heart-to-heart interview with Lianhe Zaobao, her first with local mainstream media. She talks about matters ranging from her profession, her difficult decision not to hear criminal cases, and several sad court cases.
“I’m a very private person and I don’t like publicity. That is why you will not see me in those magazines for socialites, such as Tatler and Prestige.”
“I like to travel and I am also very fond of classical music. I am a member of the Friends of the SSO. I seldom read for pleasure. I mainly read law reports and law articles.”
“Having come from a small place like Malacca, I would never have expected that I would one day become a Singapore Supreme Court Justice. I feel that I have been very fortunate.”
“My mother passed away in 1988. When I was appointed as Judicial Commissioner in 1991, my brother told me that if my mother had been alive, she would have been very proud of me. I lost my father at a young age and it was my mother who raised my siblings and me. Though my mother was illiterate, she managed the family very well.”
“I like to keep myself busy. I’m on the panel of arbitrators at the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC). I’ve been fortunate to get arbitration work soon after I retired and it is still ongoing. I also do volunteer work. After my retirement, the Ministry of Home Affairs invited me to become a member of the board of the Yellow Ribbon Fund.”
“Although I am impatient, I could be very patient with litigants in person, because without a lawyer to represent them, these people would be at a disadvantage. I didn’t want such litigants to feel their opponents had better chances of winning cases than them because of having legal counsel. “
The above are some of the introspective comments shared by former Supreme Court Justice Lai Siu Chiu in her first interview with local mainstream media after retiring from the bench almost a year ago. Usually very private, the first female Judicial Commissioner and Justice of the Supreme Court of Singapore shares her thoughts on the law profession, cases that she has heard and her memorable experiences...
Rudeness of course. Lawyers who are rude not only to the bench but to their opponents and to the witnesses. I get very angry with lawyers who try to bully the witness; they raise their voice, they try and harangue the witness to get the answers they want. I tell them stop it immediately. I say, even I do not scold a witness unless there is some reason. How dare the lawyer scold the witness? Interpreters are also not allowed to scold witnesses. At one time, I told the head interpreter, it’s my prerogative as a judge to do so, but I do not scold the poor witnesses. I said I was shocked that his interpreter actually scolded a witness!
Which lawyers would you consider good role models for others?
I will not name names, but I would say that the older generation of lawyers are good role models for younger lawyers. They are never late for court, are polite and respectful, do not argue with the judge, and do not treat opposing counsel discourteously. They may mock their opponent but they know the limits. It is a shame that most of them are over 70 and seldom come to court now.
Are there things about the legal sector that give you concern?
Dishonest behaviour by lawyers is a matter of concern. I get worried when I see cases of lawyers running away with their clients’ money. One seldom sees veteran lawyers doing this. Such cases invariably involve young lawyers. What can one do? Do we teach them in postgraduate courses or do we need to instil something in them? I do not know. The Law Society has tried its best.
Another problem is the growing number of lawyers choosing corporate law, because mergers and acquisitions and financial services are very lucrative. This has meant a corresponding decline in the number of litigation lawyers. If a lawyer shows up in court for a case and is ill-prepared, he or she may get a dressing down from the judge. If a witness’ oral testimony differs from his affidavit evidence not because he is untruthful but because it is his first time in court and he is frightened, you could lose the case for your client even though it is not your fault, and you then have to face up to the consequences. Clients who lose a case may refuse to pay your fees. These are all the risks that litigation lawyers face.
What are your views on young lawyers?
Young lawyers are always in a hurry. They forget that they took an oath when they became lawyers and they forget that the legal profession is something very sacred and noble.
I often get asked by parents: Justice Lai, my son or daughter wants to study law. What do you think? My first question would be: Why law?
Often, the answer would be that law allows one to earn a lot of money. I would not say anything but I would think: Oh my goodness! That is the wrong thinking! What is regrettable is that this has been the trend. Compared to doctors, engineers and other professions, the starting pay of lawyers is the highest, and this has led to this problem we have today.
People choose law not because of noble ideals, a desire to help defend the poor or to fight criminal cases, Rather, they see it as a profession that makes a lot of money, a cash cow. They think, I can work in a large law firm and once I achieve this objective, I can make partner quickly. This is a worrying trend.
Law is no longer a noble profession but one where you can dream of making your first million by the age of 30 if you work hard. When I started out, there were very few lawyers; I was the 280th! There are now four to five thousand lawyers. It has become an industry where competition is intense.
Do female justices hear cases differently compared to their male counterparts?
There is little difference in how male and female judges hear a case. However, I believe that female justices are relatively more knowledgeable about the price of goods in divorce cases involving maintenance. Justice Judith Prakash and I are especially careful and detailed when it comes to examining maintenance expenditures.
I once asked a male judge, do you know the prices of different brands of lipstick such as Maybelline and Estee Lauder? He looked at me and admitted that he did not. Therefore, when ruling on maintenance for wife and children, the court adopts a broad brush approach and will not scrutinise the price of each item in detail.
Justices Judith Prakash and Belinda Ang will be retiring in 2016 and 2019 respectively. I hope that other female justices will be appointed by then. Of course, this should be based on their ability and competence and not just for the sake of appointing a lady judge. It will be up to the Chief Justice to look for suitable candidates.
Why did you choose not to hear criminal cases?
I have strong views on sentences for certain offences and I was concerned that my emotions would override my logic. This would not be fair to the accused. That was why I insisted on not hearing criminal cases.
I also found criminal cases very dreary but commercial cases are highly interesting. I dealt with all sorts of commercial cases and I did everything. In Hokkien, they call it “bao ka liao”.
In the commercial fraud cases that I have seen, I saw people using all sorts of tricks and coming up with highly creative ideas to cheat their directors, partners or banks. It was shocking! That is why artificial intelligence such as computers and robots will never be able to replace humans. They do not have the ingenuity of the human mind. Though we may be judges, we also learn from our cases and from human nature.
“Some lawyers do not apologise if they are late”
Lai Siu Chiu is highly conscientious when it comes to how she treats others and deals with her affairs. She would apologise to lawyers if she kept them waiting for trials to start because she had to deal with chamber applications first, even though the delay was not her fault.
She noted that some lawyers have the habit of coming to court late. Quite a number of them would not even apologise when they do so.
One time, she needed to deal with 40 uncontested divorce cases. When it came to the sixth case, the lawyer was not in court when his matter was called. He came later but by then, he had lost his place in the queue and his matter was put at the bottom of the list.
“Because he chose not to be on time in court, he ended up waiting for more than two hours before his turn came. He learnt his lesson not to be late again for court.”
Lawyer always gave same excuse that he was late because of difficulty getting a taxi
She remembers another lawyer who represented a defendant and who was always late. The hearings for his case lasted a week and despite Justice Lai’s secretary calling his office every time, the lawyer always arrived late for the afternoon session. The same excuse given each time was he had difficulty getting a taxi.
“I decided not to wait for him any longer as there were other lawyers involved acting for other defendants. I would start the afternoon sessions without him as he was not cross-examining witnesses. When he realised the court would not wait for him any longer, the lawyer became punctual for both morning and afternoon hearings.”
Ang Kin Chiew had accused his parents and two brothers of not sharing the profits of their family food court business with him based on his shareholding. He took his family members to court but lost the case.
Justice Lai Siu Chiu had delivered a stern admonishment while giving her judgment: “This is a sad and worrying case. As the youngest of seven children, the plaintiff took his elderly parents and older siblings to court. I can only describe him as an unfilial son. He is Chinese, for which filial piety is the most important virtue. This is a traditional moral value of Asian society and the Chinese. In good traditional Chinese families, the young need to be filial to their parents and respect their elders.” She even used the Chinese words for unfilial, “bu xiao shun”, to criticise the plaintiff.
Why she found it sad:
“When I rebuked the plaintiff for being unfilial, my friends told me what I did was very good and I should have said what I did.”
“The plaintiff seemed to be a weak person with no ability to operate a food court. He had to rely on his older siblings to do so. He was influenced by his wife and wanted to get a bigger share of the business. Thus he did this dreadful thing. His mother was very angry and berated him in Cantonese in court. He had looked down not daring to say a word. “
2. Tussle between mistress and sons over house
Two sons of the late Dr Wong Yip Cheong, founder of Adam Road Hospital, had gone to court in a tussle with his mistress over the ownership of an $8 million bungalow at Chancery Hill Road.
Justice Lai had ruled against the sons, finding that Dr Wong, who had dementia, was mentally competent when he signed the document transferring the house to his mistress. She criticised the brothers in court for trying to wrest their father’s assets: “Your father would be heartbroken if he knows what is happening today!” The brothers subsequently lodged an appeal but this was dismissed.
Why she found it sad:
“This family dispute was very sad. I knew that Wong Yip Cheong was dying and could not reserve judgment. I gave an oral judgment on the eve of National Day, with the written grounds following later. He died two or three weeks later and his wife passed away several months following that.”
“As a court justice, we judge by the law and cannot pass moral judgment. It’s not for me to say if he should not have had this mistress. Wong had met her when he was 40 and she was much younger at 19 years of age. Since he had promised her to give her the house, it was not right for his sons to try and take it back from her. That was very wrong.”
3. Retired teacher sues bank
Hwang Cheng Tsu Hsu, a 92-year-old retired teacher from Chung Cheng High School (Main), had accused OCBC Bank of breach of contract in refusing to allow her to withdraw close to $9 million in deposits without good reason.
The bank had had doubts over her mental capacity and suspected that it was her adopted daughter who wanted the withdrawal and started the action. It thus froze the account on legal and moral grounds. Madam Hwang died in May 2010, around three weeks before the judgment was released. She lost the case. Her adopted daughter lodged an appeal, which was dismissed by the Court of Appeal. Madam Hwang’s $10 million estate was ultimately inherited by her adopted daughter.
Why she found it sad:
“Madam Hwang treated her adopted daughter as her own but the evidence that came up in court was very sad. I read her medical reports and told the doctor, who was the witness, that she came across as such a lovely person, and the doctor agreed and said yes, she was such a delight. Unfortunately, she passed away just before I released my judgment. It was very sad.”
• Born in Malacca. Youngest in the family with five brothers and two sisters. Three of her brothers are doctors. Among her siblings, she is the only one to have become a Singapore citizen. • Lost her father at the age of 12. Brought up by her mother, who was keenly aware of the importance of education. Read law in university to achieve her ambition of becoming a lawyer. • Completed her Cambridge Certificate and Higher School Certificate (HSC) in Malacca before reading law at the University of Singapore. Received her law degree in 1972. • Called to the bar in 1973. Worked at Allen & Gledhill until April 1991, becoming one of a small number of female litigators at the time. • Received her LLM from the University of London in 1977. • Appointed as the first female Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore on 2 May 1991. • Became the first female Supreme Court Justice in 1994. • Has two children. Husband is a surgeon. • Positions held include Chairperson of the Children’s Charities Association, which comprises six member societies, and Chairperson of the Membership and Social Committee of the Singapore Academy of Law. • Initiated “The LeX Factor – Law Has Talent” charity concert last year, which raised more than $300,000 for the Yellow Ribbon Fund. • Retired from the bench on 30 October 2013.
Misjudged judge . How could the law allow a young 1st female who background of single mother upbringing her up to handle my parent divorce case when i was 7. She was heavily emotional with single mother upbringing and emotional as a female judge and was new during that point of time. She reward my brith "psychopath" mom with the only property we have and monthly have to paid maintance fee to my crazy mom.and reward my dad with 3 children. 1) my mom is a real psychopath who have no emotional to her own child at all 2) its a motive 3) the law should protect the 3chilrens first ,age 7 8 and 3
8 comments:
Lai Siu Chiu recounts her four decades in law
Poh Lay Hoon, Lianhe Zaobao
13 September 2014
This article was first published on 7 September 2014 in the Singapore Mandarin broadsheet, Lianhe Zaobao.
Face-to-Face
“Talks fast, walks fast, handles things fast”. These words could be used to describe the working style of retired Supreme Court Judge, Lai Siu Chiu, 65.
She was appointed as a Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court in 1991, the first female to hold the post and also the youngest at the time.
Three years later, she made history again by becoming the first female Supreme Court Justice in Singapore.
Before her retirement at the end of October last year, Lai Siu Chiu contributed a song at a charity concert held in conjunction with the 25th anniversary of the Singapore Academy of Law.
She has continued to contribute to the nation after shedding her judge’s robes, while keeping a low profile. Starting from the middle of this month, she will take up an appointment as a member of the Presidential Council for Religious Harmony for a term of three years.
This petite 40-year law veteran sits for a heart-to-heart interview with Lianhe Zaobao, her first with local mainstream media. She talks about matters ranging from her profession, her difficult decision not to hear criminal cases, and several sad court cases.
“I’m a very private person and I don’t like publicity. That is why you will not see me in those magazines for socialites, such as Tatler and Prestige.”
“I like to travel and I am also very fond of classical music. I am a member of the Friends of the SSO. I seldom read for pleasure. I mainly read law reports and law articles.”
“Having come from a small place like Malacca, I would never have expected that I would one day become a Singapore Supreme Court Justice. I feel that I have been very fortunate.”
“My mother passed away in 1988. When I was appointed as Judicial Commissioner in 1991, my brother told me that if my mother had been alive, she would have been very proud of me. I lost my father at a young age and it was my mother who raised my siblings and me. Though my mother was illiterate, she managed the family very well.”
“I like to keep myself busy. I’m on the panel of arbitrators at the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC). I’ve been fortunate to get arbitration work soon after I retired and it is still ongoing. I also do volunteer work. After my retirement, the Ministry of Home Affairs invited me to become a member of the board of the Yellow Ribbon Fund.”
“Although I am impatient, I could be very patient with litigants in person, because without a lawyer to represent them, these people would be at a disadvantage. I didn’t want such litigants to feel their opponents had better chances of winning cases than them because of having legal counsel. “
The above are some of the introspective comments shared by former Supreme Court Justice Lai Siu Chiu in her first interview with local mainstream media after retiring from the bench almost a year ago. Usually very private, the first female Judicial Commissioner and Justice of the Supreme Court of Singapore shares her thoughts on the law profession, cases that she has heard and her memorable experiences...
Q&A
What do you find intolerable?
Rudeness of course. Lawyers who are rude not only to the bench but to their opponents and to the witnesses. I get very angry with lawyers who try to bully the witness; they raise their voice, they try and harangue the witness to get the answers they want. I tell them stop it immediately. I say, even I do not scold a witness unless there is some reason. How dare the lawyer scold the witness? Interpreters are also not allowed to scold witnesses. At one time, I told the head interpreter, it’s my prerogative as a judge to do so, but I do not scold the poor witnesses. I said I was shocked that his interpreter actually scolded a witness!
Which lawyers would you consider good role models for others?
I will not name names, but I would say that the older generation of lawyers are good role models for younger lawyers. They are never late for court, are polite and respectful, do not argue with the judge, and do not treat opposing counsel discourteously. They may mock their opponent but they know the limits. It is a shame that most of them are over 70 and seldom come to court now.
Are there things about the legal sector that give you concern?
Dishonest behaviour by lawyers is a matter of concern. I get worried when I see cases of lawyers running away with their clients’ money. One seldom sees veteran lawyers doing this. Such cases invariably involve young lawyers. What can one do? Do we teach them in postgraduate courses or do we need to instil something in them? I do not know. The Law Society has tried its best.
Another problem is the growing number of lawyers choosing corporate law, because mergers and acquisitions and financial services are very lucrative. This has meant a corresponding decline in the number of litigation lawyers. If a lawyer shows up in court for a case and is ill-prepared, he or she may get a dressing down from the judge. If a witness’ oral testimony differs from his affidavit evidence not because he is untruthful but because it is his first time in court and he is frightened, you could lose the case for your client even though it is not your fault, and you then have to face up to the consequences. Clients who lose a case may refuse to pay your fees. These are all the risks that litigation lawyers face.
What are your views on young lawyers?
Young lawyers are always in a hurry. They forget that they took an oath when they became lawyers and they forget that the legal profession is something very sacred and noble.
I often get asked by parents: Justice Lai, my son or daughter wants to study law. What do you think? My first question would be: Why law?
Often, the answer would be that law allows one to earn a lot of money. I would not say anything but I would think: Oh my goodness! That is the wrong thinking! What is regrettable is that this has been the trend. Compared to doctors, engineers and other professions, the starting pay of lawyers is the highest, and this has led to this problem we have today.
People choose law not because of noble ideals, a desire to help defend the poor or to fight criminal cases, Rather, they see it as a profession that makes a lot of money, a cash cow. They think, I can work in a large law firm and once I achieve this objective, I can make partner quickly. This is a worrying trend.
Law is no longer a noble profession but one where you can dream of making your first million by the age of 30 if you work hard. When I started out, there were very few lawyers; I was the 280th! There are now four to five thousand lawyers. It has become an industry where competition is intense.
AS A JUDGE...
Do female justices hear cases differently compared to their male counterparts?
There is little difference in how male and female judges hear a case. However, I believe that female justices are relatively more knowledgeable about the price of goods in divorce cases involving maintenance. Justice Judith Prakash and I are especially careful and detailed when it comes to examining maintenance expenditures.
I once asked a male judge, do you know the prices of different brands of lipstick such as Maybelline and Estee Lauder? He looked at me and admitted that he did not. Therefore, when ruling on maintenance for wife and children, the court adopts a broad brush approach and will not scrutinise the price of each item in detail.
Justices Judith Prakash and Belinda Ang will be retiring in 2016 and 2019 respectively. I hope that other female justices will be appointed by then. Of course, this should be based on their ability and competence and not just for the sake of appointing a lady judge. It will be up to the Chief Justice to look for suitable candidates.
Why did you choose not to hear criminal cases?
I have strong views on sentences for certain offences and I was concerned that my emotions would override my logic. This would not be fair to the accused. That was why I insisted on not hearing criminal cases.
I also found criminal cases very dreary but commercial cases are highly interesting. I dealt with all sorts of commercial cases and I did everything. In Hokkien, they call it “bao ka liao”.
In the commercial fraud cases that I have seen, I saw people using all sorts of tricks and coming up with highly creative ideas to cheat their directors, partners or banks. It was shocking! That is why artificial intelligence such as computers and robots will never be able to replace humans. They do not have the ingenuity of the human mind. Though we may be judges, we also learn from our cases and from human nature.
“Some lawyers do not apologise if they are late”
Lai Siu Chiu is highly conscientious when it comes to how she treats others and deals with her affairs. She would apologise to lawyers if she kept them waiting for trials to start because she had to deal with chamber applications first, even though the delay was not her fault.
She noted that some lawyers have the habit of coming to court late. Quite a number of them would not even apologise when they do so.
One time, she needed to deal with 40 uncontested divorce cases. When it came to the sixth case, the lawyer was not in court when his matter was called. He came later but by then, he had lost his place in the queue and his matter was put at the bottom of the list.
“Because he chose not to be on time in court, he ended up waiting for more than two hours before his turn came. He learnt his lesson not to be late again for court.”
Lawyer always gave same excuse that he was late because of difficulty getting a taxi
She remembers another lawyer who represented a defendant and who was always late. The hearings for his case lasted a week and despite Justice Lai’s secretary calling his office every time, the lawyer always arrived late for the afternoon session. The same excuse given each time was he had difficulty getting a taxi.
“I decided not to wait for him any longer as there were other lawyers involved acting for other defendants. I would start the afternoon sessions without him as he was not cross-examining witnesses. When he realised the court would not wait for him any longer, the lawyer became punctual for both morning and afternoon hearings.”
THREE SAD COURT CASES
1. Ownership dispute over family-run food court
Ang Kin Chiew had accused his parents and two brothers of not sharing the profits of their family food court business with him based on his shareholding. He took his family members to court but lost the case.
Justice Lai Siu Chiu had delivered a stern admonishment while giving her judgment: “This is a sad and worrying case. As the youngest of seven children, the plaintiff took his elderly parents and older siblings to court. I can only describe him as an unfilial son. He is Chinese, for which filial piety is the most important virtue. This is a traditional moral value of Asian society and the Chinese. In good traditional Chinese families, the young need to be filial to their parents and respect their elders.” She even used the Chinese words for unfilial, “bu xiao shun”, to criticise the plaintiff.
Why she found it sad:
“When I rebuked the plaintiff for being unfilial, my friends told me what I did was very good and I should have said what I did.”
“The plaintiff seemed to be a weak person with no ability to operate a food court. He had to rely on his older siblings to do so. He was influenced by his wife and wanted to get a bigger share of the business. Thus he did this dreadful thing. His mother was very angry and berated him in Cantonese in court. He had looked down not daring to say a word. “
2. Tussle between mistress and sons over house
Two sons of the late Dr Wong Yip Cheong, founder of Adam Road Hospital, had gone to court in a tussle with his mistress over the ownership of an $8 million bungalow at Chancery Hill Road.
Justice Lai had ruled against the sons, finding that Dr Wong, who had dementia, was mentally competent when he signed the document transferring the house to his mistress. She criticised the brothers in court for trying to wrest their father’s assets: “Your father would be heartbroken if he knows what is happening today!” The brothers subsequently lodged an appeal but this was dismissed.
Why she found it sad:
“This family dispute was very sad. I knew that Wong Yip Cheong was dying and could not reserve judgment. I gave an oral judgment on the eve of National Day, with the written grounds following later. He died two or three weeks later and his wife passed away several months following that.”
“As a court justice, we judge by the law and cannot pass moral judgment. It’s not for me to say if he should not have had this mistress. Wong had met her when he was 40 and she was much younger at 19 years of age. Since he had promised her to give her the house, it was not right for his sons to try and take it back from her. That was very wrong.”
3. Retired teacher sues bank
Hwang Cheng Tsu Hsu, a 92-year-old retired teacher from Chung Cheng High School (Main), had accused OCBC Bank of breach of contract in refusing to allow her to withdraw close to $9 million in deposits without good reason.
The bank had had doubts over her mental capacity and suspected that it was her adopted daughter who wanted the withdrawal and started the action. It thus froze the account on legal and moral grounds. Madam Hwang died in May 2010, around three weeks before the judgment was released. She lost the case. Her adopted daughter lodged an appeal, which was dismissed by the Court of Appeal. Madam Hwang’s $10 million estate was ultimately inherited by her adopted daughter.
Why she found it sad:
“Madam Hwang treated her adopted daughter as her own but the evidence that came up in court was very sad. I read her medical reports and told the doctor, who was the witness, that she came across as such a lovely person, and the doctor agreed and said yes, she was such a delight. Unfortunately, she passed away just before I released my judgment. It was very sad.”
BIOGRAPHICAL DETAILS
• Born in Malacca. Youngest in the family with five brothers and two sisters. Three of her brothers are doctors. Among her siblings, she is the only one to have become a Singapore citizen.
• Lost her father at the age of 12. Brought up by her mother, who was keenly aware of the importance of education. Read law in university to achieve her ambition of becoming a lawyer.
• Completed her Cambridge Certificate and Higher School Certificate (HSC) in Malacca before reading law at the University of Singapore. Received her law degree in 1972.
• Called to the bar in 1973. Worked at Allen & Gledhill until April 1991, becoming one of a small number of female litigators at the time.
• Received her LLM from the University of London in 1977.
• Appointed as the first female Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court of Singapore on 2 May 1991.
• Became the first female Supreme Court Justice in 1994.
• Has two children. Husband is a surgeon.
• Positions held include Chairperson of the Children’s Charities Association, which comprises six member societies, and Chairperson of the Membership and Social Committee of the Singapore Academy of Law.
• Initiated “The LeX Factor – Law Has Talent” charity concert last year, which raised more than $300,000 for the Yellow Ribbon Fund.
• Retired from the bench on 30 October 2013.
Misjudged judge . How could the law allow a young 1st female who background of single mother upbringing her up to handle my parent divorce case when i was 7. She was heavily emotional with single mother upbringing and emotional as a female judge and was new during that point of time. She reward my brith "psychopath" mom with the only property we have and monthly have to paid maintance fee to my crazy mom.and reward my dad with 3 children.
1) my mom is a real psychopath who have no emotional to her own child at all
2) its a motive
3) the law should protect the 3chilrens first ,age 7 8 and 3
May hell bless in you.
A low education father with 3 kids to feed + have to paid psychopath mom maintance monthly + property under psychopath mom.
You are emotional judged because of your upbringing and u are a young female judge without exp at all during that point of time. Misjudged.
A low education father with 3 kids to feed + have to paid psychopath mom maintance monthly + property under psychopath mom.
You are emotional judged because of your upbringing and u are a young female judge without exp at all during that point of time. Misjudged.
Post a Comment