Tycoon's Eldest Free After Buffet Assault On Boy, 3South China Morning Post - 24 Nov 2007
I read with disbelief on the South China Morning Post that a person who is 60 years of age would bully somebody as young as 3! That is 20 times!!
Won't paiseh one meh?
Anyway the person is question is Jane Ho (Please do not click to enlarge), daughter of Macau's casino mogul, Stanley Ho.
I was thinking that a person of her stature would have at least a certain minimum level of civility, than to resort to petty tactics like stomping on a little kid?
Yes, the kid was probably no angel either. How often do we see these brats running amok all over the place, unsupervised by their parents and causing a public nuisance? I would dare speculate that the kid was being kuai lan at the time of the incident that evoked such a violent reaction from Ms Ho.
Still, stomping on a kid's foot? Notice I used the word "stomp" while the newspaper article used "step"? Me exaggerate? Let's put it this way, had it been a gingerly step, you think Ms Ho would be hauled up to court for that?
I am not saying that the kid is without fault but the punishment (stomp) does not fit the crime (trip). Ms Ho's reaction could have been a spur of the moment madness. A brain fart. A gush of shit to the brain. Still, with all the shit and fart to the brain, I wonder how anybody is able to hantam a kid as young as 3?
Her rationale as I have highlighted above, was beyond belief. I mean like, WTF?
Imagine this visual where you are standing face to face with a 3 year-old. How do you hantam a kid who is barely taller than your knee?
Coming back to the kid, let me just say "Welcome to the modern era where the kids rule their parents."
Afternote: RedQueen has rightly pointed out that Ms Ho was suffering from Schizophrenia, as mentioned in the article. Schizo sufferers are known to have a higher probability of violent behavior.
So here is my question that I pose to one and all.
Was it just the kid's arse luck to be at the wrong place at the wrong time, thus giving Ms Ho the benefit of the doubt. Or was this Schizophrenia thing just some fancy mambo jambo cooked up by her expensive team of lawyers to get her off the hook?
You tell me.
Image Credit: http://www.scmp.com