We all know how the story goes. A woodcutter drops his axe into the river, and a mystical figure fishes it out for him.
At the end of the fable, the protagonist gets rewarded for his honesty. Personally, I’ve always felt that the reward part compromised the intrinsic value of virtue.
Nonetheless, we never found out what would happen if the narrative featured a dishonest man instead. I assumed that he would simply miss out on the upgrades and remain stuck with a crappy iron axe.
As it turns out, if you lie about the axes, not only will better options slip away – you’ll have to lose more than what you ask for as well.
Mobile Phone Fell Out of Unzipped Pouch
An uneventful day turned into a lesson on the merits of honesty when Mr Wang lost his phone.
On 14 Dec last year, Mr Wang walked around the Ang Mo Kio neighbourhood with an iPhone XR in his waist pouch. Unaware of the gaping zipper, the device fell out near Block 202 at Ang Mo Kio Avenue 3.
About 10 minutes later, 30-year-old Tan Yiap Ming walked past and noticed the gadget lying on a grass patch.
He then did what would soon make him a cautionary tale – he pocketed it.
Police Report Lodged
After realizing that his phone was missing, Mr Wang filed a police report.
The police detected repeated attempts to activate the phone and traced it to Tan. After three months, they found him and the lost item at his home on 12 Mar 2020.
It appears that Tan made no effort to return the phone or hand it over to authorities. In addition, he had connected it to his WiFi network.
Record of Dishonesty
Apparently, Tan had previously been convicted of dishonest misappropriations in 2019 and theft in 2010.
Guidance was given by a counsellor following the earlier conviction, but he failed to learn from it.
Counting his third time in court, the prosecutor asked for a fine of S$3,000 to be paid in instalments of S$1,000.
Considering the alternative of up to two years in jail, or both jail and fines, his punishment is a relatively compassionate one.
Warning from District Judge
Tan initially claimed that his intentions to return the phone was hindered because he had no time and that he was afraid to go to the police station.
He also said that he tried to unlock the phone to track down the owner.
Both statements were retracted when told they qualified his plea.
On another account, he cited fear induced by his previous convictions as his reason for not submitting the device to investigators.
District Judge Jasvender Kaur issued a warning: “In life, there are many temptations. You see something lying there, you want to take it, but you must not take it. It’s as simple as that.”
“If you come to court for a fourth time, you must go to jail, is that clear? So don’t be foolish and be tempted.”
Tan, who is currently working in a warehouse, tearfully agreed.
Read Also: Elderly Cleaner Allegedly Pressured To Pay Over $13K For Products After 5-Hour-Long Sales Pitch
Watch this for a complete summary of what REALLY happened to Qoo10, and why it's like a K-drama:
Read Also:
- Woman Tried Bribing Officer in S’pore Immigration, Thinking It’s a M’sia Officer
- There Might Not Be Crazy Rich Asians 2 in the Near Future
- Everything About Donald Trump’s Controversial Cabinet’s Picks That Are Known So Far
- Pet-Friendly Cafe Just 10 Minutes Away From JB CIQ Has Furry Floral Decor, Pastries & Mains
- 4 Handrolls For S$4 At Japanese Handroll Bar In Duxton Road On 17 November 2024
- Everything About The Deepfake Nude Photo Scandal in S’pore Sports School
Advertisements
