Only Appeal After Released from Prison

The following is the document to file in High Court tomorrow.

I asked for the Maximum Sentence to the subordinate court after they found all 3 of us guilty. But after the sentence, when asked about appeal, I told court I will only file appeal after the sentence is served by imprisonment and I will not pay the fine, and will conduct HungerStrike in prison. All this may sound illogical or incomprehensible, but unless I state here clearly the reason.

The reason is that I have an important objective, to tell the world a message of protest, and to show Singaporean how we need not be afraid of famiLEE LEEgime's prison and should face them up directly and fearlessly to guard our national interest and civil rights, constitutional rights, political rights, and spirit of Justice.

Shown by the history of this world, those who fight against oppression and Injustice must not be afraid of imprisonment by the Totalitarian cowards. I asked for their Maximum Sentence to show this resolve of mine. I served the entire sentence which isn't very long in my measurement with the extra hard approach by taking HungerStrike. I did to the extend of completely not drinking water when there is a realistic reason for me to do so.

I also did physical challenges like Marathon during HungerStrike, on the 2nd day I was released from prison and intravenous drips just removed. To convince fellow Singaporeans that prison and HungerStrike is not able to bring a person's physical and psychological strength down, and there is nothing to be fearful about it even though the famiLEE LEEgime try to frighten us by harassing Dr. Chee Soon Juan by sabotaging his health and doping poison into his prison food. I exposed their dirty tricks and intentions.

Why I should appeal because the injustice and unfairness still have to be addressed and highlighted by engaging with the filthy famiLEE LEEgime this way. I will go tirelessly to fight them, and not let them get away. Not to be naive that their Kangaroo will practice any justice, but that however can and MUST be exposed. :-)

---

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE

Magistrate’s Appeal )

No. 222 Of 2006 )

PS NO . 733/06 & others )

YAP KENG HO

….Appellant

VS

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

….Respondent

---

PETITION OF APPEAL

To the Honourable the Judges of the High Court of Singapore.

The PETITION of YAP KENG HO

Showeth as follows : -

1. The trial judge erred in law in not allowing the defence the opportunity to adduce evidence relevant to the defence of political motivation.




2. The trial was aborted or ought to be so when the key prosecution witnesses namely ASP Jeremy Koh and SGT Goh Wei Siong were present during the trial.




3. The prosecution failed to inform the court of the presence of the said prosecution witnesses.




4. The trial judge failed to make appropriate directions at the outset of the trial on matters relating to the presence of the aforesaid witnesses, hence rendering the conviction unsafe and unsatisfactory.




5. The trial judge made an erroneous finding when he dismissed the defence’s application to order a retrial.




6. The trial judge was prejudiced and showed a lack of indepence when he refused to allow the Defence to cross examine the prosecution witness, namely the licensing officer on the success rate of past applications for permit by political opponents.




7. The Trial Judge made an erroneous finding when he failed to take into consideration the fact that the Appellant was speaking to the constituents during the hustings of GE 2006.

Dated the day of November 2006

This application is taken out by YAP KENG HO

________________________________

YAP KENG HO

THE APPELLENT

---

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE

Magistrate’s Appeal )

No. 222 Of 2006 )

PS NO . 733/06 & others )

YAP KENG HO

….Appellant

VS

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

….Respondent

PETITION OF APPEAL

The address of service of

2