Ok, so what do I think of this recent update? She's guilty as the cookie monster with his hand in the cookie jar lah. Guilty of being shallow, irresponsible and of questionable morality.
The summary:
"...The beauty queen was convicted of five charges of misappropriation, cheating using illegally obtained credit cards, and impersonating their users' identities....
...was sentenced in May this year to 24 months of supervised probation, said a Subordinate Courts spokesman...
...was sentenced in May this year to 24 months of supervised probation, said a Subordinate Courts spokesman...
...Another 60 charges were taken into consideration for the purposes of sentencing...
...spent a total of more than $2,400...using at least three different credit cards in April and May last year...
...bought two gold anklets worth almost $1,000, a $698 mobile phone, and food and drinks at a swanky restaurant...
...her previous employer, a healthcare company, made a police report about her in April last year...
...suspected that Miss Low, who worked there for five months as a patient-service assistant, had used credit cards belonging to its patients...
...The organiser of the Miss Singapore World pageant, ERM World, did not respond to queries as to whether it was aware of her criminal record during the pageant..."
Ladies and gentlemen, I draw your attention to the last line and then I give you this:
Apparently (source not verified) when asked if the organisers knew about the report that had been made against her Miss Low replied:
"In the beginning, they did not know, but when I signed the contract, I informed the manager. They said that if the news did not leak out, they will allow me to continue in the competition. But now that the news is made public, I'm not sure what will happen next."
And again, elsewhere on the web someone wrote:
~ In ST today, it was quoted that an ERM employee said : "Singaporean did not pay for her" when asked about why the company is not responding to public queries.
So where you now Mr PR Service-Recovery Person of ERM? Come on out and answer us.
Did you really say that if the news doesn't leak out that it'll be ok? What does this tell me about your standards or criteria concerning contestants? I can understand if she got expelled from school for bad behaviour then went on to prove she could turn her life around, or if she had gone to drug rehab and come out of it stronger, or even if she was known to be associating with some 666 or 559 or some other number gang.
But I think the fact that she has a CRIMINAL RECORD kinda makes it hard for her fellow citizens to say - "aw, never mind lah, now she's sorry for what she's done and deserves a 2nd chance".
2nd chance at life maybe, but to represent my country? Be the spokesperson of our little lion city? I think not.
If she had stolen the cards to pay for her father's medical bills, to put food on the table, to pay the bills - we'd be more sympathetic. You know, poor little girl, lost, desperate to save her family... sob, sob. Yeah, we'd be all like, never mind lah. Not her fault, she didn't know where to turn. Heck, knowing Singaporeans (we're such suckers for Poor-Little-Match-Girl stories) she'd end up having a fund started in her name for the welfare of her family.
The other thing that's got my knickers in a bunch is this - how can ERM say Singaporeans didn't pay for her? Er, it's Miss Singapore right? We're Singaporeans right? I think we would like to know how you could justify having her keep her title when she's a crook? Um, does everyone else NOT see a problem with this picture? If you're not answering public queries because we "didn't pay for her" then how about you don't use the word SINGAPORE in your title? How 'bout you call her Miss ERM (from Singapore) then you can go ahead and have whoever you want represent you? I hate to be the one to tell you this, but Yes, you DO owe it to us Singaporeans to explain your choice for our ambassador. Geddit?
No comments:
Post a Comment