The letter stated that Mr. M Ravi is currently unfit to
practice law due to a relapse of bipolar disorder.
However the drama quickly turned into confusion when Mr Ravi
openly questioned the letter from the psychiatrist. The letter stated that Dr
Fones reviewed Mr Ravi on May 14 "following the concerns expressed by his
friends" but Mr Ravi claimed that the date should be July 14 and he only
saw the doctor for 10mins on that day. Not only that, Mr. Ravi claimed that the
doctor never told him of any concerns he had of his health. Mr Ravi also
insisted that this letter was just a ridiculous conspiracy against him to block
him from arguing the case.
If that wasn’t enough, the Law Society then publicly hung Mr
Wong out to dry when it said that Mr Wong acted on his own and that although Mr
Wong is the appointed lawyer to represent the society to liaise with Mr Ravi
and Dr Fones in regard to Mr Ravi’s condition, there was “no application
whatsoever by the Law Society to in any way prevent Mr Ravi from appearing in
Court”.
Now everyone in Singapore is asking what in the world prompted
Mr Wong to go down to the High Court (on his own) to present a letter from Mr
Ravi’s psychiatrist Dr Calvin Fones when he did not get any go ahead from the
Law Society? Also how could the doctor send the letter, which was wrongly
dated, to the society without informing his patient first?
So rather amazingly, it’s the Law Society and its member Mr
Wong Siew Hong that are in the hot seat right now. Not only is Mr. Ravi not in
trouble, he came out smelling like roses! In short, if this was an attempt to
block the case from being heard, as alleged by Mr. Ravi, it was so amateurish
done it was a bad, bad own goal.
2 comments:
It is now the talks of the town, everyone is suspicious of who is or are behaving erratically and mentally problematic.
No guessing game anyway, everybody knows clearly what's going on. And it is perfectly normal to fix own problem, at least logically it is so.
It's true that everyone know what's going on but what is surprising was how badly done it was by the Law Society and how quickly they hung Mr Wong out to dry. The latter was expecially bad form by them.
Post a Comment