A video emerged online showing an auntie stealing from a shop.
She could be seen taking what appears to be an alarm clock from the stall and walking away.
The entire incident was captured on CCTV, with the shop owner’s son/daughter sharing that the auntie has been stealing from their shop every weekend, between 12pm to 2pm.
She would wait for them to be preoccupied with other customers before she would nick the goods, usually a watch or an alarm clock, before fleeing the scene.
They shared that they are a small family owned business and they don’t profit much, so it angers their family that the auntie has been repeatedly stealing from their shop.
Anyone who is able to recognise the woman is requested to contact them through Instagram DMs via @may._.yen
A girl who is presumably an ITE student, took to Twitter to share her grievances about her school’s reputation.
She wrote that if she hears another “ITE no future” comment, she will go around pointing at every NUS student and calling them “sex offenders”.
She is referencing the notion of “ITE = It’s The End” made famous by Jack Neo’s 2002 movie, I Not Stupid; as well as the recent spate of sexual offences increasingly committed by students/former students of NUS.
A video emerged online showing a Singaporean, who is allegedly the same person who mocked the Circuit Breaker measures of last year, being robbed in West London.
A livestreamer named Sherwin, witnessed the attack and ran to the man’s aid, chasing away the attacker.
The victim was bloodied and seated in a heap with his mangled bicycle as he repeatedly begged for Sherwin to call the police.
User Keaven Quah recently posted on Facebook after he was fined by Safe Distancing officers while having drinks. He stated that the officers did not practice the same laws they were enforcing when they were there for their raid.
Here is the full story.
“To whom it may concern, this article is about an occasion of which me and a friend of mine decided to meet up for some drinks at a bistro (Alive located at 304 Orchard Road #03-16) ETA : 2030HRS – Shortly after we settled down at the table assigned to us with our drinks, 2 ladies (Thai accent) approached us and ask if they could join us for some drinks. We agreed and they sat opposite of us which we presume it is 1m distanced given that layout was arranged by the establishment.
Time 2130HRS – One hour into our drinking session, a raid commenced involving 10 or more safe distancing ambassadors alongside with a couple of anti-vice police officers. The confusing part was our table were the only ones being held for questioning while the other tables were not being investigated at all despite having an overwhelming number of ambassadors. Not feeling guilty, each of us proceeded to give our statement individually regards to our activity at this bistro. (Basically we drank and chatted. That’s all)
Source: Complaint Singapore
After taking our statements, we were told to wait for a verdict which we waited for more than two hours (PAST midnight) at the bistro while the rest of the customers have already left WITHOUT being investigated/questioned. (God knows what is actually gonna happen) Little to my knowledge, the 4 of us were charged under Covid Act7.(1) Every individual must keep a 1m distance from any other individual in any public place or common property. As far as I’m concerned, we did not exceed 8pax in a group under Covid Act6 : Prohibition of social gathering – (ii) not more than 8 individuals. (*No definition of individuals) Clearly our table were less than 8pax of individuals. #GreyArea
The staffs on duty did not mention any sort of breach regards to the 1 metre distancing on our table, and as per below
12.—(1) “A permitted enterprise must, in relation to its permitted premises when not closed to entry to individuals, take all reasonable steps —
(a) where seating at a table is provided for customers or visitors —
(i) to ensure that the back of every chair, or the legs of the chair if there is no such back, for each table is at all times at least one metre away from any other chair for another table; or
(ii) if the table is fixed to the floor of the premises and sub-paragraph (i) cannot be satisfied — to ensure that tables and seats for customers and visitors to the permitted premises are arranged such that each table can accommodate not more than 8 individuals seated at the table or not more than 8 individuals in each group separated by space of at least one metre”.
Source: Complaint Singapore
Measurements of the table were taken by the ambassadors with a measuring tape and found out that it was not 1m apart sitting across each other on the opposite side of the table. (Small round table, can’t expect me to bring a measuring tape with me whenever I’m outside huh?) If a fine were to be imposed, shouldn’t the establishment be charged instead of consumers like us? I’m merely a consumer given a table assigned by the staffs which I presume it serves the accordance of 1m distancing. That being said, the ambassadors were still persistent that we were the ones whom had breach the safety measures under Act7 (Individuals to keep safe distance of 1m). In other words, inter mingling in a group not more than 8pax without 1m distancing is prone to higher risk of Covid-19 spread compared to the daily non-compliance of 1m distancing in a public transport for individuals? #ContradictingAF
(Attached photos are the group of ambassadors not maintaining 1m distancing under Act(i) “at least one metre between every member of any gathering of 8 or fewer individuals in the permitted premises from any other individual who is alone, or any other individual who is a member of another such gathering, in those premises”) If the ambassadors were not practising the law, what right do they have to charge us. Practically, I’m being charged under the act that they are breaching now isn’t it?
Source: Complaint Singapore
What brings to my attention was the fact that in the event of the raid, there were several occupied tables but none of them were actually being held back for any investigation or to have their statement taken. Unfair treatment? With the overwhelming number of ambassadors (13 or more), they merely took action on the 4 of us only. What a bloody joke and waste of resources.
We felt totally cheated and wrongfully charged (grey area of the law) for this instance. Dear fellow Singaporeans, what are your views for this case?“
A video was uploaded on The Facebook page Our Grandfather Story which shows former gravedigger Johnny Tan showing what happens behind the scenes when he exhumes a body.
He also shared about all the otherworldly experiences that comes with the job. He stated on how zombies are real and how he found many precious items while working. These included several Rolexes and also precious jewellery.
A video was recently uploaded on the Instagram page sg.influenzers which shows a boy watching r-rated films when he’s pooping in the toilet.
The student could be seen with his pants down as he scrolls through an r-rated website and he was most probably going to proceed with relieving himself once he selects the most suitable film of his choice.
