LOCAL CASE:

VIVIAN LEE JAILED SIX

MONTHS OVER BAK KUT TEH
RAMADAN PHOTO
BY IDA LIM

2 7 M AY 2 0 1 6

LOCAL CASE

DEFINE SITUATION:
Vivian Lee May Ling a customer service support
representative earning RM2,600 monthly.
For the first offence, Lee and her ex boyfriend involved
publishing a seditious photograph and inviting Muslims to
break fast with bak kut teh together with a halal logo between
July 11 and 12, 2013.
Second offence, Tan and Lee were accused of displaying
pornographic pictures.
She has been charged 6 months on 27 May 2016.

LOCAL CASE
IDENTIFY THE VALUES

The court took into consideration Vivians background i.e first

time offender
Vivian did not lead the offense, she merely played passive role.

LOCAL CASE
IDENTIFY YOUR PRINCIPLES
DEONTOLOGY
Courts upheld the law.
Each person is entitled to their constitutional right of
freedom of expression within reason.

LOCAL CASE
CHOOSE YOUR LOYALTY
I decide to side with the court judgment because everyone has the
responsibility to respect the race and religion of others as it is
appropriate social behaviour.
It is not the courts intention to restrict people in the use of social media
or Internet but there needs to be a standard to control an individual to
be more responsible when uploading anything on social media
Ignorance is not a defence against the law. People must take
responsibility for their actions
Whilst under the law first-time convictions for sedition are punishable of
a maximum three-year jail term, Vivian's sentence was only 6 months.

INTERNATIONAL CASE:
AUSTRALIAN TEENAGER WENT ON
THE RUN AFTER BANK
'ACCIDENTALLY' GAVE HER 2.4M
0 5 M AY 2 0 1 6

LOCAL CASE

DEFINE SITUATION:
Christine Lee, 21 years old, a chemical engineering student.
She has been living in Australia for past 5 years.
Bank accidentally gave her $4.6 million.
She spent millions of dollars on handbags and luxury goods.
She has been charged with obtaining financial advantage by
deception and knowingly dealing with proceeds of crime.

LOCAL CASE
IDENTIFY THE VALUES
Police would struggle to prove that the spending of the money was illegal.
She did not necessarily broken the law as the money was given to her
mistakenly or not.
Lee was aware that the police were trying to contact her and obtained an
emergency Malaysian passport in order to leave the country

LOCAL CASE
IDENTIFY YOUR PRINCIPLES

DEONTOLOGY
Duty and Moral obligation
It should have been her duty to report the error to the Bank
Her actions were not morally good as they cause the Bank to lose $4.6 mil

LOCAL CASE
CHOOSE YOUR LOYALTY
I am of the opinion that Lee acted unethically. She did not apply for such facilities nor
was such facilities granted to her.
You should know what's in your account, if you realise there's something that doesn't
belong to you, it will be identified, speak to them, do the right thing, get it cleared up
as soon as possible.
It would be very tempting to spend the money but if members of the public found
money in their accounts that should not be there, or they had an ability to overdraw
on an account that they should not have, they should not spend the money.
If your not guiilty not try and run?