Singapore Local Gay News [LGBT Related News] (Compiled)

[Guest drug addiction]

Many people do not understand why individuals become addicted to drugs or how drugs change the brain to foster compulsive drug abuse. They mistakenly view drug abuse and addiction as strictly a social problem and may characterize those who take drugs as morally weak. One very common belief is that drug abusers should be able to just stop taking drugs if they are only willing to change their behavior. What people often underestimate is the complexity of drug addiction—that it is a disease that impacts the brain and because of that, stopping drug abuse is not simply a matter of willpower. Through scientific advances we now know much more about how exactly drugs work in the brain, and we also know that drug addiction can be successfully treated to help people stop abusing drugs and resume their productive lives.

Drug abuse and addiction are a major burden to society. Estimates of the total overall costs of substance abuse in the United States—including health- and crime-related costs as well as losses in productivity—exceed half a trillion dollars annually. This includes approximately $181 billion for illicit drugs,1 $168 billion for tobacco,2 and $185 billion for alcohol.3 Staggering as these numbers are, however, they do not fully describe the breadth of deleterious public health—and safety—implications, which include family disintegration, loss of employment, failure in school, domestic violence, child abuse, and other crimes.

What is drug addiction?

Addiction is a chronic, often relapsing brain disease that causes compulsive drug seeking and use despite harmful consequences to the individual who is addicted and to those around them. Drug addiction is a brain disease because the abuse of drugs leads to changes in the structure and function of the brain. Although it is true that for most people the initial decision to take drugs is voluntary, over time the changes in the brain caused by repeated drug abuse can affect a person’s self control and ability to make sound decisions, and at the same time send intense impulses to take drugs.

It is because of these changes in the brain that it is so challenging for a person who is addicted to stop abusing drugs. Fortunately, there are treatments that help people to counteract addiction’s powerful disruptive effects and regain control. Research shows that combining addiction treatment medications, if available, with behavioral therapy is the best way to ensure success for most patients. Treatment approaches that are tailored to each patient’s drug abuse patterns and any co-occurring medical, psychiatric, and social problems can lead to sustained recovery and a life without drug abuse.

Similar to other chronic, relapsing diseases, such as diabetes, asthma, or heart disease, drug addiction can be managed successfully. And, as with other chronic diseases, it is not uncommon for a person to relapse and begin abusing drugs again. Relapse, however, does not signal failure—rather, it indicates that treatment should be reinstated, adjusted, or that alternate treatment is needed to help the individual regain control and recover.

What happens to your brain when you take drugs?

Drugs are chemicals that tap into the brain’s communication system and disrupt the way nerve cells normally send, receive, and process information. There are at least two ways that drugs are able to do this: (1) by imitating the brain’s natural chemical messengers, and/or (2) by overstimulating the “reward circuit” of the brain.

Some drugs, such as marijuana and heroin, have a similar structure to chemical messengers, called neurotransmitters, which are naturally produced by the brain. Because of this similarity, these drugs are able to “fool” the brain’s receptors and activate nerve cells to send abnormal messages.

Other drugs, such as cocaine or methamphetamine, can cause the nerve cells to release abnormally large amounts of natural neurotransmitters, or prevent the normal recycling of these brain chemicals, which is needed to shut off the signal between neurons. This disruption produces a greatly amplified message that ultimately disrupts normal communication patterns.

Nearly all drugs, directly or indirectly, target the brain’s reward system by flooding the circuit with dopamine. Dopamine is a neurotransmitter present in regions of the brain that control movement, emotion, motivation, and feelings of pleasure. The overstimulation of this system, which normally responds to natural behaviors that are linked to survival (eating, spending time with loved ones, etc.), produces euphoric effects in response to the drugs. This reaction sets in motion a pattern that “teaches” people to repeat the behavior of abusing drugs.

As a person continues to abuse drugs, the brain adapts to the overwhelming surges in dopamine by producing less dopamine or by reducing the number of dopamine receptors in the reward circuit. As a result, dopamine’s impact on the reward circuit is lessened, reducing the abuser’s ability to enjoy the drugs and the things that previously brought pleasure. This decrease compels those addicted to drugs to keep abusing drugs in order to attempt to bring their dopamine function back to normal. And, they may now require larger amounts of the drug than they first did to achieve the dopamine high—an effect known as tolerance.

Long-term abuse causes changes in other brain chemical systems and circuits as well. Glutamate is a neurotransmitter that influences the reward circuit and the ability to learn. When the optimal concentration of glutamate is altered by drug abuse, the brain attempts to compensate, which can impair cognitive function. Drugs of abuse facilitate nonconscious (conditioned) learning, which leads the user to experience uncontrollable cravings when they see a place or person they associate with the drug experience, even when the drug itself is not available. Brain imaging studies of drug-addicted individuals show changes in areas of the brain that are critical to judgment, decisionmaking, learning and memory, and behavior control. Together, these changes can drive an abuser to seek out and take drugs compulsively despite adverse consequences—in other words, to become addicted to drugs.

All of the above is taken from http://www.drugabuse.gov/infofacts/understand.html

[Guest Double]

Unfortunately, the harm done is not only to himself but to the gay community since he has been perceived to be a key figure in the local fight for gay-rights.

Some of the local gays would not care if it was some non-prominent Tom, Dick or Harry was caught. And the local anti-gay people would not care much if it was some non-prominent gay that was caught.

When it is a prominent figure of a community being caught it is another matter - the harm done is not just to the person himself/herself but also to the community. For example, it makes a big difference if the person caught is a prominent monk of the Buddhist community or a prominent pastor of the Christian community or a prominent figure from an opposition party.

It is not true that the harm is done only to himself/herself for such prominent formal or informal leaders of their respective communities.

One of the things a gay activist should fight against is the reputation of gays being associated with drug-abuse and drug-addiction. A prominent gay activist who is caught for drug offenses would obviously not be helpful in the effort to tell the public that gays and drugs are not closely associated, just as a prominent Christian leader's actions of hatred would not be helpful to the Christian community's effort to proclaim a message of love. It will only serve to provide anti-gay people with another example to strengthen their argument that gays tend to be drug-abusers.

I cannot agree more. Another analogy would be when Jack Neo who was caught in his womanizing acts when he preached for good family values in his movies. It just did not blend with the image of a Cultural Medallion recipient.

This case will inevitably polarize views. To me, it is not a question of whether we support Stuart. I still think his arrest only serve to reinforce negative stigma of the gay community.

[Guest Guest]

Most people here are quick to condemn, and even quicker to not acknowledge the good things that Stuart has done for the GLBT community. If gay people are so easily divided by what the media presented, then may I add that, those who are quick to condemn, do not deserve what Stuart is trying to achieve.

It's obviously a tip-off / entrapment. And why do they want to clamp down on him? Have you hatemongers even thought / processed about it before making judgments? Judging is fine, if you so enjoy making a fool out of yourself when you are only given segment of the information provided by the media. And suddenly, so many of you people state what ought to be, and what ought not to be, what's right, and what's wrong. Stuart probably has done more good for the community here than anyone of you have done, or will ever do.

What imbecilistic behaviors. Little wonder that the gay community is an apathetic bunch, with you people around. Disgusting.

To quote Gachi Muchi : ' You really need to engage your brain more before you let ur fingers do the typing, especially in a public forum. '

Enuff said.

[Guest guest]

Here is the thing: We are know drugs are bad. Based on the report Stuart Koe was found to be in possession of "drugs".

My take on it is that if he is doing it in the privacy of his own apartment, and not harming others by distributing it etc. let him be. Public figure or not, gay advocate or not, he is human. He has every right to do what he wants in the privacy of his own house.

At the end of it, the only person that is doing harm to himself is Stuart.

am sorry, SK is definitely not the only person he has harmed. he has harmed all the gays indirectly as the general public has another strong case to accuse the gays of.

he has every right to do what he wants in the privacy of his own house IF HE WERE AN UNKNOWN. but because he is a public figure which fights for gay rights and the improve the image of gays in the general public, he SHOULD NOT be doing things that will put gays in a bad light. if you can live that kind of life, then STOP representing the gays in public.

[Guest Guest]

What imbecilistic behaviors. Little wonder that the gay community is an apathetic bunch, with you people around. Disgusting.

What u have written above is more proof-positive who the true imbecile is.

[Guest guest]

Most people here are quick to condemn, and even quicker to not acknowledge the good things that Stuart has done for the GLBT community. If gay people are so easily divided by what the media presented, then may I add that, those who are quick to condemn, do not deserve what Stuart is trying to achieve.

It's obviously a tip-off / entrapment. And why do they want to clamp down on him? Have you hatemongers even thought / processed about it before making judgments? Judging is fine, if you so enjoy making a fool out of yourself when you are only given segment of the information provided by the media. And suddenly, so many of you people state what ought to be, and what ought not to be, what's right, and what's wrong. Stuart probably has done more good for the community here than anyone of you have done, or will ever do.

What imbecilistic behaviors. Little wonder that the gay community is an apathetic bunch, with you people around. Disgusting.

in what way was it (entrapment) obvious? kindly present evidence if you dare to say such things and stand up and put it on public record since you are not part of the "apathetic bunch". stand up, present your evidence in the most open manner, you can always have it on wikileak as a venue. stop making yourself high and mighty, by calling the rest of the people disgusting!

if it is true that he has really taken those drugs, i would rather he HAS NEVER represented or done anything for the gay community. i think i am doing less harm by being unseen than him if what he has done is true. you can do 100 good deeds, but 1 error in judgment you affect the whole community.

[Guest guest]

I'm with you.

I AM CERTAINLY NOT WITH YOU!

[azuchan]

I think all you idiots quick to condemn him forget one thing. He is only charged in court. There is no finding of guilt. Yet. So before you guys open up your mouths and claim he's been doing this for years and so on and whatever vile septic rubbish you guys can think of, let the courts decide first and then do the hating later.

[Guest guest]

I think all you idiots quick to condemn him forget one thing. He is only charged in court. There is no finding of guilt. Yet. So before you guys open up your mouths and claim he's been doing this for years and so on and whatever vile septic rubbish you guys can think of, let the courts decide first and then do the hating later.

hmm... i wonder why the police don't come and charge me in court in the middle of the night... hmm... i rest my case

[Guest usfreshman]

In the US, one of the easiest and less time-consuming ways to call yourself "doctor" is to do a first professional degree like Pharmacy, Optometry or Advanced Nursing. These are fairly new professional degrees that came into force in the last twenty years when the standards of universities worldwide dropped radically. In the UK, many polytechnics now confer degrees too. So you can get a degree from Oxford Brookes University which is not remotely related to Oxford University.

In the US, the Ivy-league universities (Harvard, Yale, Columbia etc) are the top rung. Some state universities like the University of California system, Michigan and Virginia are also above average. The others are mediocre. To give yourself a title, I reckon Optometry is easiest and you can then run your optician shop and sell sunglasses too. A real PhD takes at least 5 years after your first degree (total of 9 and that's without a break) and some people also do Masters' degrees enroute, which lengthens the process. Many lose steam and leave as ABD - in other words, they finish all doctoral level courses and qualifying exams (which are really tough) but just didn't start on their dissertation, hence ABD or All But Dissertation. Even a first degree like an MD (for general practitioners) takes six to seven years including medical internship. In Singapore the MD is called the MBBS or Bachelor of Medicine cum Bachelor of Science, so people know it is a first degree. The lecturers in the medical faculty of course have higher degrees like PhDs because they teach doctors.

Just a clarification for the person who asked, not running Stuart Koe down.

[Guest Bedokbi]

Why get involved with chem? If u haven't tried chemsex u never know how good it feel. Those doing ice now are addicted. I used to chemsex almost every weekend. The nation party that was organised by Fridae?, i went there 3 times....lots of tourist and goodlking guys...many including myself were high on something.

After seeing some of my chemsex kaki got caught...supplier got caught...I told myself if I carry on....it will be my time getting caught...worst still infected wif hiv cos a lot of tops on chem wan to fxxk raw. I stopped 5 yrs ago...and it was a tough one. I changed my hp number so chemsex kaki can't contact me. I disappear from the scene.... ppl probably thought i was dead. Even now when I think of those 3 yrs of hot steamy sex high wif chem I kind of miss them but news like this of SK being caught affirm my decision to quit. Sex & drugs feels damn good but they really shouldn't be mixed.

I share the sentiments with you. I have a gf now and been a good boy since. The sex with chem was hot and steamy. Esp so when it is with a group. I got sandwich back then and at times get hard thinking of it. But agreed that this is not the way to go. Hope that I will not give in to temptation.

[muscleworship]

wait a min...

why are we trying to forgive someone even before that person has shown any signs of remorse?

why are we trying to follow other societies when we know that drugs is harmful?

if one day, every american starting shooting each other because it is cool, does that mean that we can do as well?

if you resorted to drugs, you should know that this might happen.

once this happens, don't expect everyone to be magnanimous in their comments.

does this mean that once you are a high profile activists of gay rights, you get sabotaged by others by planting this in your apartment? ever heard of "there's no smoke without fire"? is he that popular that one has to do that to frame him?

if you are blinded by his hot bod and showed signs of forgiveness because of that, you are a joke!

oh i hate drugs btw.

Edited September 15, 2010 by muscleworship

[Guest guest]

wait a min...

why are we trying to forgive someone even before that person has shown any signs of remorse?

why are we trying to follow other societies when we know that drugs is harmful?

if one day, every american starting shooting each other because it is cool, does that mean that we can do as well?

if you resorted to drugs, you should know that this might happen.

once this happens, don't expect everyone to be magnanimous in their comments.

does this mean that once you are a high profile activists of gay rights, you get sabotaged by others by planting this in your apartment? ever heard of "there's no smoke without fire"? is he that popular that one has to do that to frame him?

if you are blinded by his hot bod and showed signs of forgiveness because of that, you are a joke!

oh i hate drugs btw.

There goes another senseless rebutt about body drugs and forgiveness.

Many havent seen how SK looks without his clothes, and you are saying because we google over his hot bod, thus we can close one eye and forgive his mistakes. Which implies people here are as superficial as you, spending hours in the gym just to puff up your biceps.

Which I can also imply you are just another case of sour grapes. His body is hotter than yours and you were rejected by him once.

Looking at your pic profile, I won't be surprised you are just another gym rat user who uses steroids drugs to puff up yourself.

Now how about this logic for you?

[GachiMuchi]

Guys,

Please stick to the topic.

Your post have been moved to the Flaming Room.

Go fight there http://www.blowingwind.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=18805

[Guest anonimousie]

Sisters, before your all rush into slapping each other, look at the case on its merits.

1. Utensils with drug stains (low amounts of crystal) found in his house by police

2. News did not say he is tested positive for drugs (crystal in this case), thus one can safely assume that test was negative (first and 2nd sampling). If positive, ST/Mediacorp would have claim he was positive.

3. No one else was involve, thus again can assume he was alone in the apartment (or if there are someone, they would be also have been tested, and again negative).

He can argue:

1. Since he is negative, someone planted the things in his apartment (the news claim that they do not know if he owns the place)

2. The utensils belongs to the owner or was there before he moved in? (if he is just rented the apartment)

3. Since he is a pro-gay rights, safe sex, etc etc activist, he was just collecting the tools to "study" them after acquiring the equipment during a drug-gay party overseas (which he attended for his own "research").

[retri]

LOL

fine. don't matter. i don't need anyone to be with me on this topic. i am what i stand for, just as the rest of you are what you stand for. if you feel that i'm labeling you as an imbecile, then perhaps you are. if you are not, then there's no need to be this worked up.

[muscleworship]

I do agree on the point that if a person wants to take drugs or steroids he can jolly well do so and it has nothing to do with me.

Isn't SK taking up a leading role in gay activists role? If he is proven to be guilty, does it mean that he should be pardon because of the good he has done? We have so many similar examples in the society and the monk still has to go through public scrutiny and nonetheless jail sentence.

Do you know how much damage he will cause to the image of our gay society? Are our younger generations able to differentiate that drugs are harmful? Are we telling others that it is ok to take drugs as long as others are not involved?

Have you been in a leading role publicly where your actions have a huger-than-life effect on the public?

I have heard and experienced loads more about him that reminded me "what seems pretty on the outside may not be that perfect after all".

[Guest Featheric]

I really don't get you guys who keep honinh about SK being a prominent figure in Gay society and giving gays a bad name.

Straight people also get caught having drugs and many prominent figures at that too. Do you see them self penalizing like you are doing about the issue. It is just plain drug abuse, why bring the two subject together?

[Guest Featheric]

Isn't SK taking up a leading role in gay activists role? If he is proven to be guilty, does it mean that he should be pardon because of the good he has done? We have so many similar examples in the society and the monk still has to go through public scrutiny and nonetheless jail sentence.

Sk is not a monk. He is a lay person.

He is not a leader of any group. This comparison is far off.

Sk is businessman who has contribute in some LGBT activities.

Do you call SK by some revered name where you refer to a monk?

Does he claim that he is pure and advocate purity??

How far fetch your arguement is.

[Guest guest]

LOL

fine. don't matter. i don't need anyone to be with me on this topic. i am what i stand for, just as the rest of you are what you stand for. if you feel that i'm labeling you as an imbecile, then perhaps you are. if you are not, then there's no need to be this worked up.

piece of crap, pile of shit

[Guest guest]

Sk is not a monk. He is a lay person.

He is not a leader of any group. This comparison is far off.

Sk is businessman who has contribute in some LGBT activities.

Do you call SK by some revered name where you refer to a monk?

Does he claim that he is pure and advocate purity??

How far fetch your arguement is.

I found this from his fridae website when he sign off from articles posted by him. Seems quite active in the gay circle

Dr Stuart Koe is founder and CEO of Fridae. He holds a Doctor of Pharmacy from the University of Minnesota, specialising in HIV therapy and is currently a Board member of Hong Kong’s Aids Concern (since 2006), a founding Trustee of Singapore’s Action for AIDS Endowment Fund (since 2003), and a long time AIDS activist, having also served on AfA’s Executive Committee for several terms (since 1998). He is also the Vice Chair of APCOM's first governing board, elected in June 2010.

Unfortunately, the public will always associate him with gay because he is known as the founder of the largest gay portal. We can argue what we want but others will think otherwise. ANyway, let's not argue and see the outcome. Am sure it will be out soon. As what someone say, from the inner circle, this is not the first time he fool around with this kind of substances.

[Guest Featheric]

I found this from his fridae website when he sign off from articles posted by him. Seems quite active in the gay circle

Dr Stuart Koe is founder and CEO of Fridae. He holds a Doctor of Pharmacy from the University of Minnesota, specialising in HIV therapy and is currently a Board member of Hong Kong’s Aids Concern (since 2006), a founding Trustee of Singapore’s Action for AIDS Endowment Fund (since 2003), and a long time AIDS activist, having also served on AfA’s Executive Committee for several terms (since 1998). He is also the Vice Chair of APCOM's first governing board, elected in June 2010.

Unfortunately, the public will always associate him with gay because he is known as the founder of the largest gay portal. We can argue what we want but others will think otherwise. ANyway, let's not argue and see the outcome. Am sure it will be out soon. As what someone say, from the inner circle, this is not the first time he fool around with this kind of substances.

Yes sure, we can't stop others from thinking what they think.

But if they want to lable us according to their thinking and expect us to slap each other, should we agree and proceed accordingly. I choose to support our kind.

[Guest Guest]

Stuart Koe has a Pharmacy degree from University of Minnesota. It's a basic degree not a doctorate/PhD which Minnesota also offers. His degree is no different from the Pharmacy degree in NUS, except they call it a Pharmacy D. there and a B.Sc. here. He graduated in 1995 and he's 38 this year which means he obtained his degree at 23. Not a Ph.D for sure. Certainly not over-educated.

if its a pharmD, it's equal to doctor of pharmacy.

when i was studying pharmacy previously... our lecturers told us that pharmd is the equivalent for phd.

hence u get the title Dr. after graduating

[Guest Guest o1]

How come no one question he was charged with possession but not consumption? Like someone here posted, we probably can assume he WAS test immediately and probably found to be negative (no trace of the same drug).

Thus likelihood is 1. Something from the past, 2. Someone left in his apartment, 3. kenna sabotage.

[Guest usfreshman]

if its a pharmD, it's equal to doctor of pharmacy.

when i was studying pharmacy previously... our lecturers told us that pharmd is the equivalent for phd.

hence u get the title Dr. after graduating

Not true. Read my earlier posting. You can call yourself a "doctor" too after you complete a "first professional degree" in advanced nursing or optometry. Not a PhD, believe me. There are Wikipedia entries which clarify the status of these new-fangled "first professional degrees" which came into existence in the last two decades. The University of Minnesota, where Koe received his PharmD offers both Masters and PhD in Pharmacy too.

[Guest usfreshman]

if its a pharmD, it's equal to doctor of pharmacy.

when i was studying pharmacy previously... our lecturers told us that pharmd is the equivalent for phd.

hence u get the title Dr. after graduating

Here's a write-up from the University of Minnesota (Stuart Koe's alma mater):

The College of Pharmacy at the University of Minnesota is the only college of pharmacy in the state, offering Ph.D., M.S., and Pharm.D. programs on both the Twin Cities and Duluth campuses. (you can read more about their advanced degrees in their website)

Stuart Koe is 38. He obtained his PharmD in 1995, which means he was just 23. If you believe he can get a PhD (read my earlier post for average length of PhD's in the US) at age 23, then you can believe he will win the Nobel Prize too. Ha ha.

Anyway, isn't it better for his current case to have just a "first professional degree" as they call it? If he really has a PhD in Pharmacy, then MORE reasons for him not to be caught for drug possession as he should know better.

[Guest Bystander]

This discussion reminds me of the uproar after Perez Hilton released pictures of Dustin Lance Black having bareback sex...

Oh well, there goes one more role model in the gay community (though I'm sure role models are allowed to have their vices... otherwise we'd all be monks).

Cheers

[Guest guest]

There goes the common sayings, if you want to be a public figure then be prepared to be scrutinised my many others. likewise, if someone wants to be a gay activist, then, he should do what he preaches. As a public figure, your private life will be scrutised by others too. You can't just say "whatever i do in private is my own business" because you r setting examples for others to follow. For example, if you are an activist for HIV programs, then, you can't practise unsafe sex because that's not what you preaches ( just like say something and do another i.e. hypocrite). So if, in your personal capacity, you cannot don't have raw sex, then, don't be a spokesperson for HIV program. I am just taking this as an example and am not saying anyone is doing this.

Back in SK situation, whether it is a set up or not, "illegal" substance found in his possession smells trouble. Because he is a gay activist (you can read his fridae profile and quite prominent in gay community), he can't run away being viewed by others as one of the gay "leader" in singapore. Whether we like it or not, those straight community will definitey use it as an excuse to press down gay people and makes it more difficult in the near future for any gay events to be held in public places. Just like some government spokes person like to associate HIV with gay people still (although we know it isn't).

And if Sk really committed that offence, as gays we can't just following blindly supporting him because that makes us as drugs advocates too. So we need to have our own stand too. Be it straight or gay "wild" gatherings, there is a high chances of drugs being involved. However, the gay community gets more attention because we are the "minority" group that is still struggling for our equal rights and in singapore so called "conservative society", we are still not there yet. So we have to thread water carefully.

In future, if there are more bad news about gays i.e child molesting, drugs, toilet fun...etc getting caught... You can bet alot of privileges will be revoked i.e sauna, massage, spa...etc So be careful. You may also notice why pre-kindergarden, teaching, nurses, therapists or any jobs that involve handling kids or women, you will find very few guys are being employed. Not only this, if you are male and unmarried, you will find it more difficult to get employed in public sectors too. This is life in a conservative society. They may not say it openly but you can tell when you don't get employed or selected for interview.

[Guest Ordinary]

And if Sk really committed that offence, as gays we can't just following blindly supporting him because that makes us as drugs advocates too. So we need to have our own stand too. Be it straight or gay "wild" gatherings, there is a high chances of drugs being involved. However, the gay community gets more attention because we are the "minority" group that is still struggling for our equal rights and in singapore so called "conservative society", we are still not there yet. So we have to thread water carefully.

In future, if there are more bad news about gays i.e child molesting, drugs, toilet fun...etc getting caught... You can bet alot of privileges will be revoked i.e sauna, massage, spa...etc So be careful. You may also notice why pre-kindergarden, teaching, nurses, therapists or any jobs that involve handling kids or women, you will find very few guys are being employed. Not only this, if you are male and unmarried, you will find it more difficult to get employed in public sectors too. This is life in a conservative society. They may not say it openly but you can tell when you don't get employed or selected for interview.

Well said. Cannot agree more

[Guest Featheric]

There goes the common sayings, if you want to be a public figure then be prepared to be scrutinised my many others. likewise, if someone wants to be a gay activist, then, he should do what he preaches. As a public figure, your private life will be scrutised by others too. You can't just say "whatever i do in private is my own business" because you r setting examples for others to follow. For example, if you are an activist for HIV programs, then, you can't practise unsafe sex because that's not what you preaches ( just like say something and do another i.e. hypocrite). So if, in your personal capacity, you cannot don't have raw sex, then, don't be a spokesperson for HIV program. I am just taking this as an example and am not saying anyone is doing this.

Back in SK situation, whether it is a set up or not, "illegal" substance found in his possession smells trouble. Because he is a gay activist (you can read his fridae profile and quite prominent in gay community), he can't run away being viewed by others as one of the gay "leader" in singapore. Whether we like it or not, those straight community will definitey use it as an excuse to press down gay people and makes it more difficult in the near future for any gay events to be held in public places. Just like some government spokes person like to associate HIV with gay people still (although we know it isn't).

And if Sk really committed that offence, as gays we can't just following blindly supporting him because that makes us as drugs advocates too. So we need to have our own stand too. Be it straight or gay "wild" gatherings, there is a high chances of drugs being involved. However, the gay community gets more attention because we are the "minority" group that is still struggling for our equal rights and in singapore so called "conservative society", we are still not there yet. So we have to thread water carefully.

In future, if there are more bad news about gays i.e child molesting, drugs, toilet fun...etc getting caught... You can bet alot of privileges will be revoked i.e sauna, massage, spa...etc So be careful. You may also notice why pre-kindergarden, teaching, nurses, therapists or any jobs that involve handling kids or women, you will find very few guys are being employed. Not only this, if you are male and unmarried, you will find it more difficult to get employed in public sectors too. This is life in a conservative society. They may not say it openly but you can tell when you don't get employed or selected for interview.

That is why I never considered joinging any gay activist work. It is plain and simple that people here only care about their own skin. When everything is ok, they keep quiet. When something goes wrong, they will point their figure at you accusing you for doing more harm then good. What is the point standing out for these people.

Sk is not an anti-drug activist.

If you want to talk about AFA and unsafe sex, you may look negatively like the way you look at it. However, may I hope to make you see that perhaps SK is doing substances with his trusted partner or trusted people where only safe sex is involved.

To be practical, what support can we rander SK now?

The least you can do is stop accusing him of doing you harm.

[Guest no censorship]

That is why I never considered joinging any gay activist work. ...When something goes wrong, they will point their figure at you accusing you for doing more harm then good.

Sk is not an anti-drug activist.

If you want to talk about AFA and unsafe sex, you may look negatively like the way you look at it. However, may I hope to make you see that perhaps SK is doing substances with his trusted partner or trusted people where only safe sex is involved.

To be practical, what support can we rander SK now?

The least you can do is stop accusing him of doing you harm.

No one ask you to be a gay activist and we did not ask SK to do it too. Anyone who wants to take it upon himself to be a gay activist is welcome but make sure he or she does not get involve with drug-abuse or illegal drug possession.

The least that a gay who is into drug-abuse or illegal drug possession is not to be a key person in gay activist work. That would be really doing the gay community a favour.

Just as we do not see if fit to ask you not to voice your support for SK, we also do not see it fit for you to expect us to stop accusing him of doing us harm.

[Guest guest]

No one ask you to be a gay activist and we did not ask SK to do it too. Anyone who wants to take it upon himself to be a gay activist is welcome but make sure he or she does not get involve with drug-abuse or illegal drug possession.

The least that a gay who is into drug-abuse or illegal drug possession is not to be a key person in gay activist work. That would be really doing the gay community a favour.

Just as we do not see if fit to ask you not to voice your support for SK, we also do not see it fit for you to expect us to stop accusing him of doing us harm.

I agree with you. People forget Stuart Koe is a businessman first and foremost. Did we hear of his activist work before Fridae? If i make my money from selling organic food, i will promote organic food too. He has made so much money from the pink dollar community. Those in the loop and inside the industry know he is basically a businessman. Sorry to shatter the illusions of his supporters.

There are other gay activists worth emulating. Alec Au of Yawning Bread writes thoughtful articles and is committed to the cause through activities like IndigNation -which celebrate the contributions of the LBGT community through art, intellectual forums etc, and not by organizing Nation parties where hedonists get stoned and wild. Dr Russell Heng (and he is a REAL PhD) is another good activist. And there are many others in PLU and Aware.

[Mandrake]

No one ask you to be a gay activist and we did not ask SK to do it too. Anyone who wants to take it upon himself to be a gay activist is welcome but make sure he or she does not get involve with drug-abuse or illegal drug possession.

The least that a gay who is into drug-abuse or illegal drug possession is not to be a key person in gay activist work. That would be really doing the gay community a favour.

Just as we do not see if fit to ask you not to voice your support for SK, we also do not see it fit for you to expect us to stop accusing him of doing us harm.

Yes, I hear your "No one ask you to help!" mentality.

It's like someone who is financially troubled telling off a middle class person who is trying to help him,

"Who the hell are you to help. You are not even rich!"....

"If the rich sees this, they gonna think I am with you!"

Anyway, it's no biggy for SK. He can just forget about you and your likes once he serves his sentence in the case that is found guilty.

If he still likes his lifestyle despite of what you might think, he can jolly well move to uk.

As you do not see me fit to comment, so do I see you unfit with your smallish and cry-victim views.

I agree with you. People forget Stuart Koe is a businessman first and foremost. Did we hear of his activist work before Fridae? If i make my money from selling organic food, i will promote organic food too. He has made so much money from the pink dollar community. Those in the loop and inside the industry know he is basically a businessman. Sorry to shatter the illusions of his supporters.

There are other gay activists worth emulating. Alec Au of Yawning Bread writes thoughtful articles and is committed to the cause through activities like IndigNation -which celebrate the contributions of the LBGT community through art, intellectual forums etc, and not by organizing Nation parties where hedonists get stoned and wild. Dr Russell Heng (and he is a REAL PhD) is another good activist. And there are many others in PLU and Aware.

You got it right. As I say much earlier. He is a businessman more than a gay activist.

He is no leader of any gay right groups and he only participated in LGBT activities and organised gay gatherings (Which has nothing to do with gay rights)

It is many of you guys who say he is a gay activist that I confer to argue in this light.

What if you find that one day, the people you mentioned to be upstanding has flaws in their living lifestyles too. Would you then start condemning them like you do SK now?

Don't you think it is evident that your group of people with this arguement think small and see short.

Edited September 17, 2010 by Mandrake

[muscleworship]

Him claiming not to be a gay activist is like Sun Ho claiming not to be a pastor after appearing in revealing clothes.

Ah yes, no one is perfect but to be related to illegal drugs is more than just a flaw!

No I don't want SK to be representing anything related to gay in our country. It does not help in proving our rights to the ultra-conservative authorities.

Yes, we need rights to be gay, to be seen out and proud but not to be caught with drugs and unsafe promiscuity.

We are living in Singapore leh.... "drugs" is like a banned word!!!!!

[Guest no censorship]

Just as we do not see it fit to ask you not to voice your support for SK, we also do not see it fit for you to expect us to stop accusing him of doing us harm.

As you do not see me fit to comment, so do I see you unfit with your smallish and cry-victim views.

Please read my original sentence carefully. I did not say that I "do not see you fit to comment"

I was saying, just as I do not think it is right for me to ask you not to voice your your support for Stuart, it is also not right for his supporters to expect us not to voice our criticism of him.

I said that because one of his supporters made a post here asking us to keep quiet if we do not support Stuart.

His supporters should not ask us to shut-up just as we should not stop his supporters from voicing their support for Stuart and his alleged drug offence.

[Guest responsible gay activist]

The least that a gay who is into drug-abuse or illegal drug possession is not to do things [e.g. not be one of the two petitioners for the removal of S377A] that made him appear in the public as a key person in gay activist work. That would be really doing the gay community a favour.

:yuk:

[Guest SK is gay acitivist]

He is no leader of any gay right groups and he only participated in LGBT activities and organised gay gatherings (Which has nothing to do with gay rights)

What you said is a mistake. He did not merely participated in LGBT activities (e.g. going to saunas, attending nude foam parties) and organised gay gatherings.

He did things that have to do with gay rights.

For example, he has placed himself as one of the 3 key figures to lead the petition to the parliament [these 3 persons are distinct from the long list of names that "signed" the petition] that petitioned for the repeal of S377A. He could be just as an ordinary signatory like the rest of us instead of the distinctive role. Stuart Koe was thus one of the three names specially mentioned by the then NMP Siew Kum Hong in the Parliament.

That document presented to the parliament with Stuart Koe's name as one the three names appearing could be seen at www.parliament.gov.sg/reports/public/.../SiewKumHong-Petition(latest).pdf

So what you said, that "he only participated in LGBT activities and organised gay gatherings (Which has nothing to do with gay rights)", is untrue.

[Guest guest]

Yes, I hear your "No one ask you to help!" mentality.

It's like someone who is financially troubled telling off a middle class person who is trying to help him,

"Who the hell are you to help. You are not even rich!"....

"If the rich sees this, they gonna think I am with you!"

Anyway, it's no biggy for SK. He can just forget about you and your likes once he serves his sentence in the case that is found guilty.

If he still likes his lifestyle despite of what you might think, he can jolly well move to uk.

As you do not see me fit to comment, so do I see you unfit with your smallish and cry-victim views.

You got it right. As I say much earlier. He is a businessman more than a gay activist.

He is no leader of any gay right groups and he only participated in LGBT activities and organised gay gatherings (Which has nothing to do with gay rights)

It is many of you guys who say he is a gay activist that I confer to argue in this light.

What if you find that one day, the people you mentioned to be upstanding has flaws in their living lifestyles too. Would you then start condemning them like you do SK now?

Don't you think it is evident that your group of people with this arguement think small and see short.

Hey, I just pointed out that he is more of a businessman than activist which you agree. Is that condemning him?

And I merely gave a few names of other activists who have been around for a LONG time, like Alec Au and Dr Russell Heng who organize responsible events and don't profit from the pink community.

I may be a guest on this forum but i am starting to see that it is Stuart Koe's supporters who are overly defensive.

[Guest SK is gay acitivist]

Since Stuart by his activities (e.g. his distinctive role in the S377A petition) has made himself to be seen in the parliament and the public as a key gay-right activist, he should be careful not to be seen as illegally involved with illegal drugs. IF he has an interest in deriving pleasure from illegal drug consumption, then he should make a sacrifice by sacrifice that kind of pleasure.

IF he has an interest in deriving pleasure from illegal drug consumption, and he is unwilling to sacrifice that kind of pleasure, then he should not take up any role that would be perceived by the public as him being a gay-right activist.

[Guest overly defensive]

I may be a guest on this forum but i am starting to see that it is Stuart Koe's supporters who are overly defensive.

I think you have made a good observation

[Guest alumnus]

I think you have made a good observation

yah man, very good observation indeed. BTW, does anyone know if University of Minnesota knows about this drug charge? Stuart Koe was cited as one of their great role models. His web feature appeared in June 2010 and he was charged in May. Maybe Stuart Koe forgot to mention it to his university. Drug possession not good for image of Pharmacy department, right?

[Guest reputation damage]

BTW, does anyone know if University of Minnesota knows about this drug charge? Stuart Koe was cited as one of their great role models. His web feature appeared in June 2010 and he was charged in May. Maybe Stuart Koe forgot to mention it to his university. Drug possession not good for image of Pharmacy department, right?

Yes, u are right. A person who is into illegal drug activities will probably not be good for the University's Pharmacy Dept to be placed as one of their role models, especially so when it is a drug offense.

But to be fair, at the moment, it is only an allege offense. It has not been convicted in court yet.

[Mandrake]

What you said is a mistake. He did not merely participated in LGBT activities (e.g. going to saunas, attending nude foam parties) and organised gay gatherings.

He did things that have to do with gay rights.

For example, he has placed himself as one of the 3 key figures to lead the petition to the parliament [these 3 persons are distinct from the long list of names that "signed" the petition] that petitioned for the repeal of S377A. He could be just as an ordinary signatory like the rest of us instead of the distinctive role. Stuart Koe was thus one of the three names specially mentioned by the then NMP Siew Kum Hong in the Parliament.

That document presented to the parliament with Stuart Koe's name as one the three names appearing could be seen at www.parliament.gov.sg/reports/public/.../SiewKumHong-Petition(latest).pdf

So what you said, that "he only participated in LGBT activities and organised gay gatherings (Which has nothing to do with gay rights)", is untrue.

Alright. If what you say is true, I reconsidered what I said about him merely being a participant then an activist due to incomplete information on my part. With this input that I just got from you, I agree with you that it is reasonable to consider him one.

However, I still stand for SK having the right to choose his own lifestyle even though he is an activist as it does not directly hurt other people. I hope you guys would be more understanding as this is a first case brought into light. If this kind of contribution is not what the gay society in Singapore wants, I hope through these discussions, the gay activists or aspiring gay activists in Singapore should reconsider their contributing positions.

To no Censorship:

Since you word picked on me. I definitely did not ask you to keep queit or expect you not to comment before I replied your post. I said that the least you can do is stop accusing SK. If you do not wish to do this for him, it's your perogative.

To Guest 6.22pm:

Don't feel so victimised. It is because you forgot that you agree with "no censorship" in your previous post that SK should not be a gay activisit. Which can be infered as him saying that SK is not fit to be a gay activist. Not fit = Condemned. So don't play innocent, just retrack you footsteps a bit.

Edited September 17, 2010 by Mandrake

[Guest peacemaker]

Wah lau, people in this forum starting to nit-pick each other's postings and "inferring" all kinds of meaning. I suggest we just move on and wait for the trial. SK will get whatever he deserves anyway. And as one previous post says - he can always move to the US or UK, with the money he made from all of you through Fridae and Nation parties. Hehe.

Brudder (or sister?) Stuart, my friends who joined Fridae also contributed to your future welfare, so don't forget us okay, hehe.

[Guest gay activist]

Alright. If what you say is true, I reconsidered what I said about him merely being a participant then an activist due to incomplete information on my part. With this input that I just got from you, I agree with you that it is reasonable to consider him one.

that is commendable of u hugs

However, I still stand for SK having the right to choose his own lifestyle even though he is an activist as it does not directly hurt other people.

sure... it is your freedom and perogative to stand for SK

If this kind of contribution is not what the gay society in Singapore wants, I hope through these discussions, the gay activists or aspiring gay activists in Singapore should reconsider their contributing positions.

The gay community here is very diversified, which different persons having different preferences regarding the type of gay activists there should be.

What gay activists and aspiring activists (straight or queer) fighting for gays should consider is whether or not they are willing to lead a life free from drug-abuse if they want to take on the role as prominent activists.

I said that the least you can do is stop accusing SK. If you do not wish to do this for him, it's your perogative.

It is good that you have this respect for freedom of expression of diversified opinions regarding SK :thumb:

hugs

[amitie]

(10 September 2010)

Chief executive and founder of lifestyle portal Fridae.com, Dr Stuart Koe, was charged in court on Wednesday with possessing 0.01 gram of methamphetamine ( aka "Ice" )

The 38-year-old Singaporean was also charged with possessing utensils used in drug consumption like a plastic dropper and an empty straw that was stained with methamphetamine.

The drug and utensils were found in a flat in Holland Avenue on May 27 at 12.55am. Dr Koe faces a jail term of up to 10 years or a maximum fine of $20,000 or both on the charge of drug possession.

On the other charge, he can be jailed up to three years or fined up to $10,000 or both. Dr Koe told the court that he will claim trial and will be engaging a lawyer.

http://www.todayonline.com/Hotnews/EDC100910-0000070/Fridae,com-founder-charged-with-drug-possession

[Guest SKII]

I guess where most people are against the idea of drug abuse, regardless of whether he is straight/bi/gay. Are we going to support someone just because he is a prominent figure in the gay community? If a MP is caught for drug abuse despite having done so much for the nation, what would the response be? Do we pardon him just because he has done so much good deeds?

Whether Dr SK is guilty or not, it will be up to the authorities. But CNB would not arrest someone without gathering sufficient evidence. Otherwise it would damage their credibility. NKF and Ren-Ci are very good examples.

[Guest Neutral]

Its pretty amazing to read the amount of interesting inputs, people here have contributed, when they really don't even know SK personally that well.

Thus when you do not know a person, personally, that person is merely an image in your mind, which none of your speculations can rub, none even on the surface of any truth.

From what you speculate so fervently, it does truly reflect your own state of understanding and maturity.

AND your true inner state of who you really are, collectively.

So do you understand what I am saying, do you accept this truth, before I can proceed further on, without much interferences or flaming ?

Thus what SK does is none of our business, that is if you were to enlarge this issue.

The most important here, is who you really are, and what you, as individuals, who can learn from this and, what you can learn about yourselves, when someone comes along and tell you, how small and petty your mind is. Thus you've got alot more, to learn about yourselves, rather than slashing at someone, you don't even know.

I am not a fervent SK's supporter (like many here would like to termed as), but merely here to level things which seems to be a little, out of hand.

I maybe hightlighting some new pointers. You may not like or agree with it, but at the end, its up to your maturity to handle yourelves.

For those who thinks SK really sucks as a gay activitist. I suggest you take over this difficult role, if you think you can do a better job than he can. Its so easy to let someone do the job, while all you do, is to sit back, and talk talk talk.

It is a not easy being an activist, especially, if you are speaking out for gay rights, especially more in a place conservative, and homophobic as Singapore. Once you step out of the crowd and speak out your mind, its is not surprising you will be watched very closely by the authorities.

But he is entitled to his own freedoma and lifestyle. He is answerable for it, without the need for you to judge.

He doesnt have to be a goody two shoes for anyone. Because I know him well enough.

Being an activist doesn't mean you have to be elected to be one, or you automatically become a celebrity. You just volunteer to step out of the lazy scared masses, to voice out your opinions , hoping the authories will see some true in it, accept it and try to strike a balance where both sides are contented.

While he have voiced and fought for more gays rights, more gay freedom of expression in forums, allow more gays activities and events to take place without being harassed by the authorities, and have fought for more medical care and allowances for HIV patients for you gays.lesbians,bisexuals out there, shouldn't you be at least be grateful and give him his freedom, to have his own lifestyle?

In none of his speeches, did he said he is a gay's role model. He didn't advocate the possession /use of drugs.He never did once wanted people to emulate his lifestyle. If you were to know him personally, he is a very private person, apart from his profession and being an activist

We have compared him with some other examples which i seriously think is is unsound and unfair.

He was not like a Jack Neo, who tried to potray a wholesome, loving , responsible Singaporean husband, but was later exposed of his sex scandals.

He was not like the Hong Kong TWINS girls, who tried to potray some heathly,angelic, wholesome image, but only of one was later exposed for her sex scandal with Edison Chen, was that image, shattered.

If you really dislike SK and no longer thinks he should be some "Role Model", then may I suggest you withdraw all your profiles from Fridae.

Walk the walk if you really believe in something.

But you can't and you wouldn't because it has become such a forum to express yourself, to be connected to the gay world out there, and at the same time, hook up each other.

And who gave you Fridae, may I ask?

Sure, someone will shout, but drug possession is wrong, then you will conclude possession = comsumption, and that ALL PEOPLE WHO TAKES DRUGS ARE BAD.

Really? PEOPLE WHO TAKES DRUGS ARE ALL BAD?

Again it divides this arguement, into two more angle of perceptions.

So you mean good people dont take drugs.

So you think it is ok to smoke and drink?

We are not naive to know that these two substances are toxic which destroy and kill your lungs and liver, very very very slowly.

So does that mean things that will affect you very very slowly are good?

Now do you know why tobacco and liquors have being allowed by the authories, to be around for such a long time?

Thats because of the amount of revenues they are making from the taxes they imposed.

Thus no matter how high they are going to rise the price for the two items, people will still buy. Do you know why?

Because they are already addicted to them.

And how many of you out there, use poppers when you have sex?

Wouldn't poppers, after a long usage, will slowly affect your brain's nervous system?

And how many out there, without poppers', can't bring yourself to feel good and climax while having sex?

Isn't that a form of drugs? Isn't that a form od addiction ?

Is that a natural way you induce yourself to a higher state of ecstasty?

Someone stated that SK, in this incident, has tarnished the public's opinion on gay. That the public will always associate gays with drugs, after countless attempts have being made, to shift the public out of this mind set.

Then may I asked, is that so?

Are you so weak that you allow the public to stereotype you as such ?

Why do you need to shift all the blame to SK, when you as individual, should have conducted yourselves well, or if not, better ?

Shouldn't you be responsible for your own individual lifestyles, acts and deeds?

Franky speaking, you just have to browse through some of the threads here, to know your answers.

You have threads on public toilet cruisings, threads on how to hit and get straight man in bed for sex, threads on cruising in public swimmimg pools, threads on cruising in CBP etc.

Thus You don't have to blame SK , when those who wrote such threads, and those who choose to participate, have already invited public's frowning and scorning. I have straight friends who came across this forum and other gay blogs. And I am afraid their feedback is very negative.

You have always wanted public acceptance and respect, but by such acts, you have thwarted what you have always longed for.

You sabotaged yourself unknowingly, I am afraid, yet at the same time, unknowingly pointing the fingers at others.

None of us are really angels here. Because we are imperfect and are hypocrites in our own ways. We just like to paint that angelic side in us for others to see, while we just love to highlight the demons in others.

Till you dare to admit yor own short comings, you will never be aware of who you are and start to see things in a bigger picture.

There is no real order in life because life is still so grey. Those who need so much orders, rules, black and white, beliefs or definitions to live in order to be happy are really the insane ones.

So there is no need to judge SK so vehemently, while we all have our own cluttered demons in our own closets, yet to be cleared.

There's no need to expect so much of him, when in truth, he doesn't even bothered or care a damn who you are.

Theres an old movie by Barbara Streisand, called Nuts (1987)in which she was a prostitute, who was trial by the court for her profession and tested for her sanity.

In which she defended herself in this powerful script to the judge -

And i think you know what I trying to bring across once you watched this short clip

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ePdor7JX20[media/]

[Guest Taken from YB]

The news hit the gay community like a thunderbolt. Stuart Koe, the founder and chief executive of Asia’s leading English-language gay and lesbian portal Fridae.com (it also has a very active Chinese section) was charged with drug possession about a week ago.

Disclosure: This writer knows Stuart personally.

Here is the news report from Channel NewsAsia:

10 September 2010

Channel NewsAsia

Gay portal CEO and founder charged in court with drug possession

Chief executive and founder of a gay web portal, Stuart Koe was charged in court for drug possession on Wednesday.

The 38-year-old Singaporean was charged with possessing 0.01 gramme of methamphetamine and utensils used in drug consumption.

The drug and items were found in a flat in Holland Avenue on May 27 this year.

For these charges, he faces a combined jail term of up to 13 years, or a maximum fine of $30,000, or both.

Koe could not be contacted for comments.

The news was also carried in the Straits Times.

However, this essay is not about this case; it would not be appropriate for me to comment on it. In any case, I know nothing about the facts of the case except what I have read in the media. I have not discussed it with Stuart except to offer my moral support and any practical assistance he may need. For now, I shall expect my readers to hold fast to an important principle: One is innocent until proven guilty.

There was however, one tiny little thing about the news story that I found very curious, and that became the seed from which this essay germinated. As you can see, the report said the quantity involved was 0.01 gram of methamphetamine, which is more commonly known as ice.

For days after that, I tried to imagine what 0.01 gram of anything might look like. When I made my morning coffee and stirred in some sugar, I wondered what 0.01g of sugar might look to the eye. When I did my laundry, I wondered if the grain or two of detergent on my fingernail amounted to 0.01g.

One-hundredth of a gram. Can one, in the ordinary meaning of the word, “possess” that miniscule amount? Is it not too small for a human, lumbering giant as he is, to hold in confinement? Can we reasonably prevent this quantum from being lifted by the gentlest breeze, escaping our ownership?

And yet, we can be sent to jail for that, so says our Misuse of Drugs Act.

* * * * *

I began to imagine various scenarios that might get me into trouble.

Supposing I chanced upon an antique opium pipe at a flea market selling at an irresistible discount, and I buy it. Since it’s an antique, I would hardly scrub it, paint it or do anything to it except keep it exactly the way it is. Its authenticity is what gives it value. Yet that very authenticity which I would be keen to preserve would likely mean traces of opium inside it.

I had no intention of owning the opium; I merely wanted the pipe. What would our Misuse of Drugs Act have to say about that?

A big No, it seems. I would be in trouble over both the traces of opium, and the pipe itself. Section 9 of the Act says:

9. Except as authorised by this Act, it shall be an offence for a person to have in his possession any pipe, syringe, utensil, apparatus or other article intended for the smoking, administration or consumption of a controlled drug.

Then my imagination began running even more wildly. Supposing, I said to myself, I went to a party at someone’s condo home where there were a few other guests I had never met before. One of these strangers, unknown to me, goes into a toilet to snort some cocaine. I, unluckily, am the next person to use the toilet, and my shirtsleeve brushes against some surface, on which a little cocaine dust had settled.

My sleeve picks up that dust, but I am totally unaware of it.

But the police have been tailing the abuser and he is arrested soon after. The police also ask the condo management for tapes from the closed-circuit cameras that watch over the entrance lobby to the building. Reviewing the tapes, the police identify who the other persons going to the same party are, and that includes me. They can also see from the video that I wore a checkered blue shirt that evening.

A week later, police officers are knocking on my door at 5 o’clock in the morning. They search my apartment and happen to see the checkered blue shirt in my laundry basket. That of course is taken away for testing, and of course, it comes back positive for 0.01g of cocaine.

The police ask me: Do you possess this shirt. I say Yes.

Were you at the party? I say Yes again.

I would be in deep trouble. What does the law say? Section 18(1):

Presumption of possession and knowledge of controlled drugs

18. —(1) Any person who is proved to have had in his possession or custody or under his control —

(a) anything containing a controlled drug;

(b) the keys of anything containing a controlled drug;

© the keys of any place or premises or any part thereof in which a controlled drug is found; or

(d) a document of title relating to a controlled drug or any other document intended for the delivery of a controlled drug,

shall, until the contrary is proved, be presumed to have had that drug in his possession.

(emphasis added by Yawning Bread)

I possessed the shirt which “contained” the drug. Doesn’t augur well at all.

Naturally, I protest my innocence. I have no idea how my shirt got contaminated with cocaine, I tell the investigating officer. But it’s not good enough. The law contains presumptions. They don’t have to prove I knew about it. I have to prove the contrary: that I didn’t know. The word “presumed” is there in the last line of the above quote.

Moreover, subsections (2) and (3) of Section 18 say:

18. —(2) Any person who is proved or presumed to have had a controlled drug in his possession shall, until the contrary is proved, be presumed to have known the nature of that drug.

(3) The presumptions provided for in this section shall not be rebutted by proof that the accused never had physical possession of the controlled drug.

Then, as if the above are not enough, I was associating with the cocaine abuser for several hours at the party. Subsection (4) is so ambiguous that everyone else at the party may be held equally liable for what he had in his pocket.

(4) Where one of 2 or more persons with the knowledge and consent of the rest has any controlled drug in his possession, it shall be deemed to be in the possession of each and all of them.

What on earth is meant by “knowledge and consent”? Suppose, at some later point during the party, the abuser told others in the room — with me within earshot — that he had some extra to spare if anyone were interested. No one took up his offer, as far as I could tell. Did I have “knowledge and consent”?

I didn’t actually see the cocaine; he didn’t show it to others. He merely said he had some on hand. Would that be enough to constitute knowledge? The rest laughed it off but carried on socialising. Did our continuing to stay in the apartment (with him there too) indicate consent?

If that’s the case, I was not merely in “possession” of the trace amount on my shirtsleeve, but jointly and severally in “possession” of the entire packet inside this stranger’s pocket!

The more one reads our laws, with their sweeping scope and trip-wire presumptions, the scarier everything seems.

[Guest guest]

It seems like both "neutral" and " Take from YB" knew SK quite well. So can we ask the question " so did he ever use these kind of illegal substances in the past, present or whatever?" or are you close to him enough to be able to swear that "he never never used such illegal substances". Because if you dont, then, you are no diff from the rest of the people whom u said doesn't know him at all! And please, do not used the example of

"He was not like the Hong Kong TWINS girls, who tried to potray some heathly,angelic, wholesome image, but only of one was later exposed for her sex scandal with Edison Chen, was that image, shattered"

because one of the twins is supposed to be Edison's close girlfriend (everyone knows about it). So for them to have sex is quite common. For them to film it, it is also common for couples to film their love making. Also the picture wasn't leaked out on purpose and she wasn't caught sleeping with other guys. So this is a wrong analogy. It is quite common that couples, when they are in love, can get abit daring when making love i.e I am sure you guys when making love can also scream out loud although in other times can behave like a good little boi right????

I am not here to crticise him too but just to ask how wellyou know him either. Chinese sayings" no wind no tide" so let's see. Everyone also cry foul when " the head of NKF and Renci were initially charged" look what happend?