• 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.

NUS law professor in CPIB probe over exchanging grades for sex

that's why i said beginning of end
just because he is a lawyer means he can overcome whatever "abuse" at him?

From the decision not to provide access to certain NUS documents oredi can see the trend. You know I know lah. :rolleyes:

Sorry, changed your sentence a little bit. Hope you don't mind.

Say too much and it becomes an offence of "Scandalising the Court". ;)
 
Last edited:
Law prof says ex-student was making use of him

Print

Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email
Source
Straits Times
Date
12 Apr 2013
Author
Walter Sim And Bryna Singh

IT WAS his former student Darinne Ko who was more guilty because she was making use of him to give herself a better future, law professor Tey Tsun Hang had claimed in a statement to anti-graft officers last year.

"I wish to say that her motive for giving me the gifts and sex was with guilty intent," Tey had said then. He is now on trial for corruptly obtaining gifts and sex from Ms Ko in exchange for awarding her better grades. "She invested or gave me a little. In return I had to give her a bright future."

Tey, 41, had also accused Ms Ko, 23, of expecting him to show her favour, to help her become a justice law clerk and get into an international law firm. "I think that she is guiltier than I am," he said.

These emerged yesterday as Tey, who is conducting his own defence, cross-examined the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) officer who recorded the statement on May 18 last year.

The statement, taken by CPIB deputy director of investigations Teng Khee Fatt, is one of six that have since been admitted as evidence by the trial judge.

Tey explained in the statement that he had bumped up Ms Ko's grade for her research paper from D to A, to improve her cohort ranking.

"She belongs to the bottom 20 to 25 per cent (of the cohort)," the statement read. "With an A for her research paper, she may be promoted to the top 20 per cent."

Mr Teng, however, testified yesterday that he had learnt later that it was impossible for Ms Ko's ranking to improve just by awarding her an A grade.

This prompted a testy exchange, with Tey accusing Mr Teng of "negligence". He charged that the CPIB officer should have been aware of that before recording his statement, and yet "insisted on extracting a false confession" from Tey.

But Mr Teng explained that he was unaware then because he had not read the statements recorded by other CPIB officers that explained the process, prior to his meeting with Tey.

At this point, Tey slammed a stack of papers onto a bench.

Tey, who has been trying to challenge his confessions in the statements, later implied that Mr Teng was responsible for the implication of "two innocent" assistant registrars of the High Court in the case, but Mr Teng disagreed.

He said it was Tey who brought up the names of assistant registrars Colin Seow and Elaine Chew, and who had claimed they gave him items such as a printer, a watch and a shirt.

These, however, are not related to the six corruption charges.

Earlier, Mr Teng was also questioned about his meetings with Ms Ko last year, in relation to the prosecution's application to discredit her January court testimony. The court heard then that Ms Ko had struck a deal with Mr Teng over the wording of her statements, to which he denied.

But yesterday, Tey accused Mr Teng of "disbelieving" Ms Ko.

He said the two occasions of sex with Ms Ko were acts of love by her and not bribes, especially since they were her first and second sexual encounters - one of which occurred on her then boyfriend's birthday.

"You assumed it was a mutually corrupt relationship, when it was a romantic one," he said to the CPIB investigator.

Mr Teng again flatly dismissed Tey's allegation and added: "We do not assume. We find facts."

The trial continues today.

[email protected]

[email protected]
 
Darrine Ko actually had sex with Prof on her ex-boyfriend's birthday?

I hope Mark Chen is feeling okay. Luckily dump her already.


女生向调查员自爆,男友生日当天,与教授上床。

邓胜华今早供证时说,在4月7日,他在办公室向高文慧了解她送教授礼物的时间点,及礼物和成绩的关系,还有她和教授之间的关系演变等细节。

邓胜华说,高文慧非常合作,向他透露她和郑之间发生性关系的地点。

“我要她提供日期,她说其中一次发生关系,是在男友生日当天。”

郑尊行口供书自爆与高文慧4天做爱2次,还用手机拍淫照;高文慧前男友“Mark Chen”名字曝光。完整报道,请翻阅11.04.2013《联合晚报》。
 
He said the two occasions of sex with Ms Ko were acts of love by her and not bribes, especially since they were her first and second sexual encounters - one of which occurred on her then boyfriend's birthday.

Show acts of love by having sex with her on her then boyfriend's birthday.

How ignominious this Tey fellow can be to say it, even it is said by her. :o
 
Last edited:
Quite frankly, I don’t care what kind of person this Ah Tey is. What I see so far is not good, but that is not the point. The point is: did this bugger commit the crime for which he is accused. That is all that the Court should be concerned about. That too is all Non-Kaypoh Sinkies should be concerned about. The rest frankly is none of anybody’s business, including me. Too much Kay-pohness is bad – look what happened to Princess Diana. She too was “guilty” of adultery.

Why is the media being used in this manner to make it impossible for particular accused persons (Lecher Tey, Cecilia Sue, Ng Boon Gay, Peter Lim, City Harvest people, all those “tainted” by association with them, etc) to carry on a normal life whatever the outcome of the trials? Watch this video and come to your own conclusion.

My conclusion? In those instances mentioned in the video, trial by media occurred because the newspapers there were after profits. For Sinkieland, it is because the Master is not happy with something else not mentioned in the trial. We all know who ST, AsiaOne, CNA, Mediacorp, etc is controlled by. As for the social media, it doesn’t cost much to hire IBs and extrapolate ST tactics into this “Brave New World”.

@ 1:34 "Media focus becomes less about the crime and more about the person's character". PAP IBs - Gotcha!

[video=youtube;m3V__g3NQ_Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3V__g3NQ_Q[/video]
 
Last edited:
Spot on Scroobal. Nobody can do anything to him if he didn't do the opening for them. If he had been able to keep his dick in his pants and control his greed. Nothing others could have done to him.


He is a class act by himself. He has only got himself to blame.
 
Welcome to the Scroobal and ChewCheng comedy show! :oIo:

You are given this FREE show because the Scums in White still thinks SINKIES are daft. :D
 
Spot on Scroobal. Nobody can do anything to him if he didn't do the opening for them. If he had been able to keep his dick in his pants and control his greed. Nothing others could have done to him.

Imo, even if he is guilty, he could have defended himself better in court. To make matters worse, ex-DJ and JLC. A policeman with 10 years of field experience would have fared better. Tey should have hired a top criminal lawyer. Not Peter Low and certainly, with the benefit of hindsight, defend himself.
 
I have to agree GD. This lead me to believe that it is very different when one is defending for others and when defending for himself. The former is easier and would have a clearer mind. He should have maybe gotten NBG's lawyer but looking at his character, wanting free gifts and greedy. He is probably too stingy to want to spend money on them.


Imo, even if he is guilty, he could have defended himself better in court. To make matters worse, ex-DJ and JLC. A policeman with 10 years of field experience would have fared better. Tey should have hired a top criminal lawyer. Not Peter Low and certainly, with the benefit of hindsight, defend himself.
 
Imo, even if he is guilty, he could have defended himself better in court. To make matters worse, ex-DJ and JLC. A policeman with 10 years of field experience would have fared better. Tey should have hired a top criminal lawyer. Not Peter Low and certainly, with the benefit of hindsight, defend himself.

Ah Meng says:

- Should be "even if NOT guilty, he could have defended himself better in court". Nice Jedi trick. If I wasn't a novice Jedi, wouldn't have spotted it like the Sinkies here. Of course, you'll say it was a typo. But was it really?

- Of course lah, if money is no object, and KANGAROO court don't bar you from hiring the truly best aka Queen's Counsel AND you don't mind recovering ZERO of your costs even if you win, like that I also know what to do lah. Truth of the matter is, all of Ah Gay's legal costs came out of his own pocket and will NOT be compensated though he won. After the case is over, Ah Gay, Ah Lim, Ah Tey and Ah Whoever are the Next Non-subservient One(s) will have to live on money or love and fresh air? Go figure.

- In the meantime, the prosecution's cost is funded by ... ... ... your friendly Sinkie, the TAXPAYER. Same also for Ah Gay, Ah Lim, CHC and Ah Whoever are the Next Non-subservient One(s). So who is the Chao Kuan and cheapskate one here? Sinkies are mainly ball-less, but they are not dumb. They know what is going on.

Shanmugam and all the previous Law Ministers are very well paid. First World court rules are not as stated above. In First World countries, if you win, you can recover your legal costs. This has been so since the 60s in some countries. Why did these Law Ministers not do anything to FIX, ahem I mean reform, our outdated laws when they had so much time to do it? Because, the present state of affairs is useful for ...... yes, you got it ...... FIXING people.

Besides, even if Ah Gay, Ah Lim, Ah Tey and Ah Whoever are the Next Non-subservient One(s) want to save their money for life after the trial, what has that got to do with the Kay-Poh Sinkies. What right does it give the Kay-Poh to jump to conclusions about whoever is the accused?

The KANGAROO decision is already evident. What Sinkies need to do is to acknowledge that it is a KANGAROO decision. Better if they can be like people elsewhere - go out and protest, but 50 years of brainwashing ain't gonna be undone so easily or fast.
 
Last edited:
Ah Meng says:

- Should be "even if NOT guilty, he could have defended himself better in court". Nice Jedi trick. If I wasn't a novice Jedi, wouldn't have spotted it like the Sinkies here. Of course, you'll say it was a typo. But was it really?

- Of course lah, if money is no object, and KANGAROO court don't bar you from hiring the truly best aka Queen's Counsel AND you don't mind recovering ZERO of your costs even if you win, like that I also know what to do lah. Truth of the matter is, all of Ah Gay's legal costs came out of his own pocket and will NOT be compensated though he won. After the case is over, Ah Gay, Ah Lim, Ah Tey and Ah Whoever are the Next Non-subservient One(s) will have to live on money or love and fresh air? Go figure.

- In the meantime, the prosecution's cost is funded by ... ... ... your friendly Sinkie, the TAXPAYER. Same also for Ah Gay, Ah Lim, CHC and Ah Whoever are the Next Non-subservient One(s). So who is the Chao Kuan and cheapskate one here? Sinkies are mainly ball-less, but they are not dumb. They know what is going on.

Shanmugam and all the previous Law Ministers are very well paid. First World court rules are not as stated above. In First World countries, if you win, you can recover your legal costs. This has been so since the 60s in some countries. Why did these Law Ministers not do anything to FIX, ahem I mean reform, our outdated laws when they had so much time to do it? Because, the present state of affairs is useful for ...... yes, you got it ...... FIXING people.

Besides, even if Ah Gay, Ah Lim, Ah Tey and Ah Whoever are the Next Non-subservient One(s) want to save their money for life after the trial, what has that got to do with the Kay-Poh Sinkies. What right does it give the Kay-Poh to jump to conclusions about whoever is the accused?

The KANGAROO decision is already evident. What Sinkies need to do is to acknowledge that it is a KANGAROO decision. Better if they can be like people elsewhere - go out and protest, but 50 years of brainwashing ain't gonna be undone so easily or fast.

I thought you were calling for some restraint as regards "scandalising the court" dude?
 
Last edited:
I thought you were calling for some restraint as regards "scandalising the court" dude?

For those identities are known. I don't want her to get into trouble. :D

The "scandalising the court" thingy should be abolished as outdated. First world countries have done so. Judges are not saints.
 
Take it easy bro, calm down.

You are overly emotional and very excited about this guy. Not sure what sort of relationship you have with him and seeing what has been doing, I think nobody is surprised. He is being rightly called to account for his actions and sadly he is burying himself.

You obviously have an issue with Wong Meng Meng, the courts and CPIB but these are your personal challenges and best handled within the confines of your own World. Honestly we don't need to know and we don't care. .

None of us can be blamed for the mess that he has created for himself. 99% would not have done the things that he had done and 99% would not have taken on the Courts and CPIB in that manner that he has. He certainly has a fool for a lawyer and friends of a similar ilk.

If you are one of those he has taken advantage of and you believed it was true love, either lodge a complaint if you have not given him any gifts or if you have, just move on and erase the memory.

Ps. Who the fuck cares about the colour of the sofa. Honestly, get a life.



For those identities are known. I don't want her to get into trouble. :D

The "scandalising the court" thingy should be abolished as outdated. First world countries have done so. Judges are not saints.
 
Take it easy bro, calm down.

.................

You obviously have an issue with Wong Meng Meng, the courts and CPIB but these are your personal challenges and best handled within the confines of your own World. Honestly we don't need to know and we don't care. .

.................

If you are one of those he has taken advantage of and you believed it was true love, either lodge a complaint if you have not given him any gifts or if you have, just move on and erase the memory.

Ps. Who the fuck cares about the colour of the sofa. Honestly, get a life.

Insinuating, insinuating, insinuating
Now I know why they call Scroobal cunning
Every citizen should be interested in the Rule of Law
Don't need to be related to anybody to have that concern
This reply ain't meant for you
It is for the average bystander
The citizens whose minds are not dulled
Because their stomaches have been filled
If a confession can be extracted by force
From elite Tom, Dick or Harry
And it be accepted as evidence
You too could be the next victim of such Mafia tactics
Even if your nick be Scroobal
Whether Scroobal is also screwing females not his wife
Or just being friendly with them, ain't nobody's business
'Cos that's not the question before the Judge

Video is "HOW MEDIA ACCUSATION BECOMES EVIDENCE" (which is NOT how it's supposed to work). :p

Watch the video and see how the lady describes starting @ 1:00 the Media painting a character for Zimmerman (an accused being tried before a Court). They sent Scroobal to paint a character, persona, or whatever for Ah Tey? You, the citizen, who tomorrow may have a "confession" extracted from you be the judge. :)

I think it should be clear by now to everyone in this forum that Scroobal is a PAP mole. Cheers Uncle and have a good weekend, me sure am going to have a swell one.


[video=youtube;IWDp3BK3Lb0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWDp3BK3Lb0[/video]
 
Last edited:

Law prof in sex-for-grades trial disputes recorded CPIB statement

By Claire Huang
POSTED: 12 Apr 2013 4:52 PM

The law professor accused of corruptly obtaining gifts and sex from a former student on Friday continued to take issue with words and phrases in his statement recorded by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB).


stock-tey-tsun-hang-01.jpg


National University of Singapore (NUS) law professor Tey Tsun Hang. (photo: Francine Lim, channelnewsasia.com)

SINGAPORE: The law professor accused of corruptly obtaining gifts and sex from a former student on Friday continued to take issue with words and phrases in his statement recorded by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB).

Tey Tsun Hang, 41, faces six allegations that he obtained gifts and sex from his former student, 23-year-old Darinne Ko, in return for giving her better grades between May and July 2010.

On Friday morning, Tey said he could not have used the words "corrupt intent" in the statement recorded by CPIB's Deputy Director Teng Khee Fatt, much less volunteer the definition of those words, "so he could be nailed on the wall".

"So are you seriously proposing a person under interrogation would want to volunteer to you, to describe to you in great detail, detailed meaning ‘of corrupt intent’ so he could be nailed on the wall?" said Tey.

Mr Teng replied Tey had used the words "with corrupt intent" in his previous statements and he was trying to find out from Tey what he had meant by it.

But Tey argued that Mr Teng had given "the most ludicrous proposition for a person under interrogation and psychoactive medication to volunteer the minute definition exercise of ‘corrupt intent’, so as to help himself be nailed on the wall". Mr Teng repeated that Tey had told him so.

Tey also accused Mr Teng of typing some paragraphs himself but the witness said that "was exactly what Professor Tey had told me" to do.

Tey, a former district judge, said throughout on Thursday and Friday Mr Teng's "linguistic expressions" used in court "are similarly manifested in all three statements" he had recorded on 17, 18 and 24 May 2012. Mr Teng disagreed.

A phrase raised during the hearing was described by Tey as "downright nonsensical" - "Bad faiths mean wrong conscientious".

Mr Teng again said it was what Tey had wanted to put in the statement.

In an earlier statement, Tey had said he had given better grades to Ms Ko for two papers, in Personal Property Law as well as Equity and Trust.

In his later statement recorded by Mr Teng, he was allowed to retract that point.

On Friday, Tey said it was because by then, Mr Teng had already received information from the National University of Singapore that the alteration of grades in those two modules "had no basis whatsoever".

Mr Teng explained that Tey was "trying to confuse" him by telling him that he changed Ms Ko's grades at first and saying he did not later.

Later in the day, Tey applied to recall prosecution witness Darinne Ko but was turned down by Chief District Judge Tan Siong Thye.

The prosecution had also asked to review the evidence over the weekend, so that it can decide whether to close its case by Monday morning.

Once the prosecution wraps up its case, the defence's case will start.

- CNA/xq


 
Back
Top