Khaw was made to look silly in this case.
-
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.
Nparks ass director on trial next month for 22k Brompton bike scandal
- Thread starter Rogue Trader
- Start date
-
- Tags
- corruption nparks
Khaw was made to look silly in this case.
All of us (unlike our dear MIW!!) knows it's impossible to eradicate corruption. U can pay people sky high salaries, put in all kind of rigorous process, audit gorzillio times..etc, but corruption will still persists.The most u can do is limit it. That's why we all here laugh at MIW, they think they can control it!! Worse they think it's all gone when it's happening under their very noses!!
Agree. Can never be eradicated. High salaries, it can be argued, may make one even more greedy and corrupt. Good intel is needed from anti graft agencies not total reliance from whistle blowers and anonymous complaints.
The pappies way of limiting corruption via high salaries is like attempting to put out a fire by pouring kerosene over it.
Cheating is in human nature. If there is no corruption, I worry!! Seriously, we all should worry!!
My definition of corruption includes nepotism and cronyism. Paying someone super high salary when that person CMI is also corruption.
Don't worry, is the trial judge Shanmugam again? He will acquit Bernard on the same fucked logic he used to acquit Ng Boon Gay. Namely, there was a conflict of interest because Bernard is butt buddy with the supplier, but since there is no proof Bernard took money from him, therefore, they cannot be corruption. Because why? Conflict of interest is not the same as corruption, mah.
No sex appeal unlike the alpha man type Ng Boon Gay LOL?
He should have gone for the chain-less, shaft-driven bicycle. It's much cheaper and a much better bicycle than those chain driven ones.
http://www.dynamicbicycles.com/
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/9OQd5JExTUQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>)
Is heavy and bulky cannot fold into compact how to carry into MRT/bus. That Npark will debate.
They have folding bike too. It's clean, durable, no messy greasy chains and as the gears are enclosed, need very little maintenance.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/-mmquUKFAP8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>)
Last edited:
NParks officer's defence calls for his acquittal
Lawyer argues he didn't break law even if actions were 'reprehensible'
Published on Apr 02, 2014
Bernard Lim is accused of lying to auditors over the $57,200 purchase of 26 Brompton bicycles. -- ST FILE PHOTO: WONG KWAI CHOW
By Ian Poh
The National Parks Board (NParks) assistant director accused of lying to auditors over the $57,200 purchase of 26 Brompton bicycles did not break the law even if his actions might have been "morally reprehensible", a court heard yesterday.
Bernard Lim Yong Soon, 42, allegedly lied to the National Development Ministry (MND) on July 18, 2012 that he did not know the director of a bicycle supplier before it bid for the contract. Lim is also accused of instigating Bikehop director, Mr Lawrence Lim Chun How, to perpetuate the lie.
But these charges, argued defence lawyer Lawrence Ang, were founded on an "over-simplistic view" of the law.
Urging the court to acquit his client without calling for his defence, Mr Ang referred to the testimony given by nine witnesses during the trial, which began on March 11.
Get the full story from The Straits Times.
WTF? they wanna win the case based on vocab and technicality??
NParks officer's defence calls for his acquittal
Lawyer argues he didn't break law even if actions were 'reprehensible'
Published on Apr 02, 2014
Bernard Lim is accused of lying to auditors over the $57,200 purchase of 26 Brompton bicycles. -- ST FILE PHOTO: WONG KWAI CHOW
By Ian Poh
The National Parks Board (NParks) assistant director accused of lying to auditors over the $57,200 purchase of 26 Brompton bicycles did not break the law even if his actions might have been "morally reprehensible", a court heard yesterday.
Last edited:
Full article here:
http://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/slw...arks-officers-defence-calls-for-his-acquittal
NParks officer's defence calls for his acquittal Print Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email
Source
Straits Times
Date
02 Apr 2014
Author Ian Poh
Lawyer argues he didn't break law even if actions were 'reprehensible'
THE National Parks Board (NParks) assistant director accused of lying to auditors over the $57,200 purchase of 26 Brompton bicycles did not break the law even if his actions might have been "morally reprehensible", a court heard yesterday.
Bernard Lim Yong Soon, 42, allegedly lied to the National Development Ministry (MND) on July 18, 2012 that he did not know the director of a bicycle supplier before it bid for the contract. Lim is also accused of instigating Bikehop director, Mr Lawrence Lim Chun How, to perpetuate the lie.
But these charges, argued defence lawyer Lawrence Ang, were founded on an "over-simplistic view" of the law.
Urging the court to acquit his client without calling for his defence, Mr Ang referred to the testimony given by nine witnesses during the trial, which began on March 11.
He alleged deficiencies in the prosecution's case, which was closed last Wednesday.
These included vagueness in the charges, a lack of authority of the auditors to investigate the relation between the two men, and lapses during investigations by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB).
For example, it had emerged in court that Lim told an anti-graft officer on Nov 15, 2012, that he lied because he feared disciplinary action. But this statement, Mr Ang then pointed out, was made while Lim was being investigated for cheating, not lying. Neither had the MND auditors made it clear to Lim during his July 18 interview that he was being formally investigated.
Said Mr Ang yesterday: "...the CPIB investigators, despite their claim, effectively conducted no investigations into the present offences before charging the accused in court."
The lawyer added that though Mr Lawrence Lim had testified that Lim told him during a phone call to "try" not to tell anyone the two men knew each other, this was, at best, a "request of a general nature" to hide the relationship, rather than an instigation to lie to the auditors.
Earlier in the trial, the court heard that the two men met at a social event in 2011. It also heard that Lim tipped the Bikehop director off about the January 2012 tender which the firm then put in the sole bid for.
If convicted, Lim, who is now suspended from his job, can be jailed for up to a year and fined up to $5,000. The prosecution is expected to respond to Mr Ang's submissions tomorrow.
[email protected]
Source: Straits Times © Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. Permission required for reproduction.
http://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/slw...arks-officers-defence-calls-for-his-acquittal
NParks officer's defence calls for his acquittal Print Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email
Source
Straits Times
Date
02 Apr 2014
Author Ian Poh
Lawyer argues he didn't break law even if actions were 'reprehensible'
THE National Parks Board (NParks) assistant director accused of lying to auditors over the $57,200 purchase of 26 Brompton bicycles did not break the law even if his actions might have been "morally reprehensible", a court heard yesterday.
Bernard Lim Yong Soon, 42, allegedly lied to the National Development Ministry (MND) on July 18, 2012 that he did not know the director of a bicycle supplier before it bid for the contract. Lim is also accused of instigating Bikehop director, Mr Lawrence Lim Chun How, to perpetuate the lie.
But these charges, argued defence lawyer Lawrence Ang, were founded on an "over-simplistic view" of the law.
Urging the court to acquit his client without calling for his defence, Mr Ang referred to the testimony given by nine witnesses during the trial, which began on March 11.
He alleged deficiencies in the prosecution's case, which was closed last Wednesday.
These included vagueness in the charges, a lack of authority of the auditors to investigate the relation between the two men, and lapses during investigations by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB).
For example, it had emerged in court that Lim told an anti-graft officer on Nov 15, 2012, that he lied because he feared disciplinary action. But this statement, Mr Ang then pointed out, was made while Lim was being investigated for cheating, not lying. Neither had the MND auditors made it clear to Lim during his July 18 interview that he was being formally investigated.
Said Mr Ang yesterday: "...the CPIB investigators, despite their claim, effectively conducted no investigations into the present offences before charging the accused in court."
The lawyer added that though Mr Lawrence Lim had testified that Lim told him during a phone call to "try" not to tell anyone the two men knew each other, this was, at best, a "request of a general nature" to hide the relationship, rather than an instigation to lie to the auditors.
Earlier in the trial, the court heard that the two men met at a social event in 2011. It also heard that Lim tipped the Bikehop director off about the January 2012 tender which the firm then put in the sole bid for.
If convicted, Lim, who is now suspended from his job, can be jailed for up to a year and fined up to $5,000. The prosecution is expected to respond to Mr Ang's submissions tomorrow.
[email protected]
Source: Straits Times © Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. Permission required for reproduction.
The explanation is very clear and precise. You got to prove that Bernard receive any benefit (Sex , Gift and Money) in kind before a corruption charge can be laid upon.
I think it will be just a slap on the wrist. But that guy will be out of civil service sector forever.
Our gahmen Gebiz is a joke!! most of the gahmen head who calls for tender already fixed with
the contractor of his/her choice, just like Bernard Lim his buddy bike shop boss!
You see Gebiz will called at 3 to 5 contractors to view the projects give details, blur blur..
so that he can answer to their Gahmen auditors, I have 5 contrators tender for the jobe what!!
But inside they already had who in mind!! I hv been to to such Gebiz tender exercise for at least 3 years
in the 3 years of wasting my time my company had never won any tender even though we quote at a lost! no profit!!
One out right tender from Botanical gardens you can see the head of department and the contractors are so
buddy buddy.. they were about 4-5 contractors vying for the projects, my boss told me quote below cost...see
if we can get the job, in the end we still cant get the job!! So I told my boss forget about gahmen Gebiz!!
its a joke and a scam, the head of depatement already FIXED with the contractors!! just like mee siam mai hum said:
I'll FIXED the Opposition!!
Sound familiar?? Gahmen should investigate in Gebiz!!! Fixed!!
the contractor of his/her choice, just like Bernard Lim his buddy bike shop boss!
You see Gebiz will called at 3 to 5 contractors to view the projects give details, blur blur..
so that he can answer to their Gahmen auditors, I have 5 contrators tender for the jobe what!!
But inside they already had who in mind!! I hv been to to such Gebiz tender exercise for at least 3 years
in the 3 years of wasting my time my company had never won any tender even though we quote at a lost! no profit!!
One out right tender from Botanical gardens you can see the head of department and the contractors are so
buddy buddy.. they were about 4-5 contractors vying for the projects, my boss told me quote below cost...see
if we can get the job, in the end we still cant get the job!! So I told my boss forget about gahmen Gebiz!!
its a joke and a scam, the head of depatement already FIXED with the contractors!! just like mee siam mai hum said:
I'll FIXED the Opposition!!
Sound familiar?? Gahmen should investigate in Gebiz!!! Fixed!!
Last edited:
That's normal in Sinking Land. It's call LEEGALISED CORRUPTION!
Similar threads
