- Joined
- Dec 6, 2018
- Messages
- 15,748
- Points
- 113
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Iswaran has a taste of his own medicine. Now he knows how Sinkies feel all these years under the PAP justice system.
- Thread starter A Singaporean
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2010
- Messages
- 2,595
- Points
- 113
How did the prosecution list the wife as a witness? Couldn't she stay mum or was there conditions in exchange for leniency?
Waiting for erection day to unleash their staged performances.More than 1 year already Iswaran case still have not started ??? I thot quietly cased closed like Woody Goh son case.
If you are being investigated for a crime and your wife diam diam when police interviewed her, surely adverse inference will be drawn against you.
If she was asked how many times she had sex a week, and with who, of course she can diam diam.
Drag drag drag until the people forget the case.
It's useful to know how the game is played.
Everyone knows the right of silence of the accused means the defense is under no obligation to disclose anything to the prosecution.
On the other hand, the prosecution has the right to NOT disclose if the information in the possession of the prosecution tends to support the prosecution's case. So if the prosecution has a witness statement that supports the prosecution's case, and if the prosecution intends to call the witness to testify in Court, then it's under no obligation to disclose to the defense. This is to ensure that the accused cannot tailor his defense according to the prosecution's witness statement.
However, if the prosecution's witness statement is in favor of the accused, then the prosecution is under an obligation to disclose. Similarly, if the prosecution has obtained a witness statement, but the prosecution is not going to call the witness in Court to testify.
So now you see where Bayi is coming from.
Everyone knows the right of silence of the accused means the defense is under no obligation to disclose anything to the prosecution.
On the other hand, the prosecution has the right to NOT disclose if the information in the possession of the prosecution tends to support the prosecution's case. So if the prosecution has a witness statement that supports the prosecution's case, and if the prosecution intends to call the witness to testify in Court, then it's under no obligation to disclose to the defense. This is to ensure that the accused cannot tailor his defense according to the prosecution's witness statement.
However, if the prosecution's witness statement is in favor of the accused, then the prosecution is under an obligation to disclose. Similarly, if the prosecution has obtained a witness statement, but the prosecution is not going to call the witness in Court to testify.
So now you see where Bayi is coming from.
- Joined
- May 31, 2024
- Messages
- 363
- Points
- 43
https://www.straitstimes.com/singap...e-against-former-transport-minister-s-iswaran
UPDATED FEB 05, 2024, 07:42 PM
FacebookTelegram
SINGAPORE - Former transport minister S. Iswaran was on Jan 18 handed 27 charges, comprising two counts of corruption, 24 counts of obtaining items from someone he had business dealings with as a public servant, and one of obstructing the course of justice.
Most of the charges involve property tycoon Ong Beng Seng, who has not been charged.
With the matter scheduled for a pre-trial conference on March 1, The Straits Times looks at how the case may play out in the next few weeks.
Q: What happens at a pre-trial conference (PTC)?
A: Largely administrative matters, including updating the court on the status of the case and the scheduling of dates for future sittings, said Mr Alexander Woon, who practises at RHTLaw Asia and lectures at the Singapore University of Social Sciences.
Held before a court, PTCs involve the defence, the prosecution, a judge and the accused person, if his attendance has not been dispensed with.
Concurrently, away from the court, there could be communication between the defence and the prosecution, with the defence asking for more information about the case or submitting representations.
He added that in the majority of cases, these representations are often rejected.
He said: “For most cases – and most cases are routine – there’s nothing much to say. The prosecution would have already considered the evidence, and they would just move on with the case.
“For a complex case like this one – there could be changes. Maybe there could be angles that haven’t been examined.”
Ahead of the first pre-trial conference date, the defence may be in the process of writing such representations, or they could still be piecing together information about the case, said Associate Professor Mervyn Cheong from the National University of Singapore’s law faculty.
Iswaran’s team of lawyers includes Senior Counsel Davinder Singh from Davinder Singh Chambers. The prosecution team is led by Chief Prosecutor Tan Kiat Pheng.
The pre-trial conference may follow a criminal case disclosure conference, where both sides disclose information of what they are going to produce in court during the trial.
This would include a list of witnesses on either side, and statements from the accused that the prosecution intends to rely on.
Mr Woon said this disclosure process would apply to Iswaran’s charges, unless waived or if he instead decides to plead guilty.
Q: How long will the court processes take?
A: On April 19, 1975, then Minister of State for Environment Wee Toon Boon was charged with corruption involving $839,023.
His trial took place between June 31 and Aug 26 that year, and he was sentenced on Sept 2, 1975 to four years and six months’ jail after he was found guilty of all five charges.
Iswaran’s trial could take a lot longer, said Mr Woon, adding that cases are a lot more complex now because of technology and data.
“There’s a lot more to do in terms of gathering evidence, and the volume of evidence is much larger nowadays. It can go into terabytes of data.
“In the older days, most evidence was physical documents or oral testimonies from witnesses and there’s only so much of such evidence that you can gather. Information now is essentially unlimited,” he said.
Q: What role could Mr Ong Beng Seng play in the case against Iswaran?
A: If Iswaran’s case goes to trial, it is likely that he will be called up as a witness, given his alleged involvement in many of the charges, said Prof Cheong, who practises at Advocatus Law.
He could be called up by the defence or the prosecution.
“If Mr Ong didn’t give information in the statements that he made during investigations that implicates Iswaran, but is consistent with Iswaran’s defence, then it would make more sense for the defence to call him as a witness,” said Prof Cheong.
But if Mr Ong takes the stand and contradicts the statements he had made earlier, he can be impeached.
In 2013, Ms Cecilia Sue, a key prosecution witness in a corruption trial involving former anti-narcotics chief Ng Boon Gay, was impeached over numerous discrepancies in the testimony she had given investigators.
Mr Ng, who was acquitted after a trial, was accused of corruptly obtaining sexual favours from Ms Sue.
In acquitting Mr Ng, the judge noted that the Prevention of Corruption Act states that a civil servant who obtains gratification from someone who has or is seeking business dealings with the Government is presumed to have done so corruptly.
The onus was on the civil servant to prove otherwise, which Mr Ng did, ruled the judge.
Q: What’s next for Mr Ong?
A: After Iswaran was charged, the Attorney-General’s Chambers said it will take a decision in respect of the investigations against Mr Ong and others, after the case against the former transport minister has been completed.
Mr Woon said the prosecution has discretion over if and when to bring charges against Mr Ong.
While there is no statute of limitations in Singapore, Mr Woon said that as a matter of fairness, they will have to deal with Mr Ong’s case sooner rather than later, following the conclusion of Iswaran’s case.
He said an individual who cooperates with the authorities during current investigations, including as a prosecution witness, may have his role in the investigations taken as a mitigating factor, should he be charged.
If found guilty, the individual could be afforded a lighter sentence. Mr Woon said this is a normal part of the criminal justice process.
However, he added this does not mean that the prosecution should hold this over his head to make him compliant during the trial and incriminate his co-accused.
“There could be ethical issues with that, and I wouldn’t jump to that conclusion without a basis,” he added.
UPDATED FEB 05, 2024, 07:42 PM
FacebookTelegram
SINGAPORE - Former transport minister S. Iswaran was on Jan 18 handed 27 charges, comprising two counts of corruption, 24 counts of obtaining items from someone he had business dealings with as a public servant, and one of obstructing the course of justice.
Most of the charges involve property tycoon Ong Beng Seng, who has not been charged.
With the matter scheduled for a pre-trial conference on March 1, The Straits Times looks at how the case may play out in the next few weeks.
Q: What happens at a pre-trial conference (PTC)?
A: Largely administrative matters, including updating the court on the status of the case and the scheduling of dates for future sittings, said Mr Alexander Woon, who practises at RHTLaw Asia and lectures at the Singapore University of Social Sciences.
Held before a court, PTCs involve the defence, the prosecution, a judge and the accused person, if his attendance has not been dispensed with.
Concurrently, away from the court, there could be communication between the defence and the prosecution, with the defence asking for more information about the case or submitting representations.
He added that in the majority of cases, these representations are often rejected.
He said: “For most cases – and most cases are routine – there’s nothing much to say. The prosecution would have already considered the evidence, and they would just move on with the case.
“For a complex case like this one – there could be changes. Maybe there could be angles that haven’t been examined.”
Ahead of the first pre-trial conference date, the defence may be in the process of writing such representations, or they could still be piecing together information about the case, said Associate Professor Mervyn Cheong from the National University of Singapore’s law faculty.
Iswaran’s team of lawyers includes Senior Counsel Davinder Singh from Davinder Singh Chambers. The prosecution team is led by Chief Prosecutor Tan Kiat Pheng.
The pre-trial conference may follow a criminal case disclosure conference, where both sides disclose information of what they are going to produce in court during the trial.
This would include a list of witnesses on either side, and statements from the accused that the prosecution intends to rely on.
Mr Woon said this disclosure process would apply to Iswaran’s charges, unless waived or if he instead decides to plead guilty.
Q: How long will the court processes take?
A: On April 19, 1975, then Minister of State for Environment Wee Toon Boon was charged with corruption involving $839,023.
His trial took place between June 31 and Aug 26 that year, and he was sentenced on Sept 2, 1975 to four years and six months’ jail after he was found guilty of all five charges.
Iswaran’s trial could take a lot longer, said Mr Woon, adding that cases are a lot more complex now because of technology and data.
“There’s a lot more to do in terms of gathering evidence, and the volume of evidence is much larger nowadays. It can go into terabytes of data.
“In the older days, most evidence was physical documents or oral testimonies from witnesses and there’s only so much of such evidence that you can gather. Information now is essentially unlimited,” he said.
Q: What role could Mr Ong Beng Seng play in the case against Iswaran?
A: If Iswaran’s case goes to trial, it is likely that he will be called up as a witness, given his alleged involvement in many of the charges, said Prof Cheong, who practises at Advocatus Law.
He could be called up by the defence or the prosecution.
“If Mr Ong didn’t give information in the statements that he made during investigations that implicates Iswaran, but is consistent with Iswaran’s defence, then it would make more sense for the defence to call him as a witness,” said Prof Cheong.
But if Mr Ong takes the stand and contradicts the statements he had made earlier, he can be impeached.
In 2013, Ms Cecilia Sue, a key prosecution witness in a corruption trial involving former anti-narcotics chief Ng Boon Gay, was impeached over numerous discrepancies in the testimony she had given investigators.
Mr Ng, who was acquitted after a trial, was accused of corruptly obtaining sexual favours from Ms Sue.
In acquitting Mr Ng, the judge noted that the Prevention of Corruption Act states that a civil servant who obtains gratification from someone who has or is seeking business dealings with the Government is presumed to have done so corruptly.
The onus was on the civil servant to prove otherwise, which Mr Ng did, ruled the judge.
Q: What’s next for Mr Ong?
A: After Iswaran was charged, the Attorney-General’s Chambers said it will take a decision in respect of the investigations against Mr Ong and others, after the case against the former transport minister has been completed.
Mr Woon said the prosecution has discretion over if and when to bring charges against Mr Ong.
While there is no statute of limitations in Singapore, Mr Woon said that as a matter of fairness, they will have to deal with Mr Ong’s case sooner rather than later, following the conclusion of Iswaran’s case.
He said an individual who cooperates with the authorities during current investigations, including as a prosecution witness, may have his role in the investigations taken as a mitigating factor, should he be charged.
If found guilty, the individual could be afforded a lighter sentence. Mr Woon said this is a normal part of the criminal justice process.
However, he added this does not mean that the prosecution should hold this over his head to make him compliant during the trial and incriminate his co-accused.
“There could be ethical issues with that, and I wouldn’t jump to that conclusion without a basis,” he added.
There are 3 CCDCs (Criminal Case Disclosure Conference). Team B (B for Bayi) will review "the spoils" collected at the CCDCs and then submit its case for the Defense. After that, Prosecution will give Team B a supplementary bundle, and then Iswaran can decide if he wants to plead guilty or fight it out in Court.So,Iswaran case and Woody son case will be adjourned to next year 2025 AFTER the coming GE in DEC 2024.
Similar threads
