Former SCDF and CNB chiefs arrested

[Way2GO]

dimsum:

Out of curiosity, I hope the lawyers will also reveal more details of messages sent by Gay to her.

dis is wan fr Gay to her mentioned by Daddy-D above: “My SP is a chip in your body now.”
how wld u interpret dis msg?
Singapore Polytechnic? :faint: :slapshead:

[Way2GO]

Lilac66:

Heard you've collected?

heard fr who? :nunchuk:
me do like Ben&Jerry ice-cream,
but I m not gay leh.

[Way2GO]

Daddy

Defense lawyer is out to prove C and Gay had an affair, and apart from personal indiscretion, Gay is not corrupt.


Simi logic? :? Still conflict of interest right?
:siao:

Conflict of interest is present.
PCA Chp 241, Part III, para 8 makes presumption of corruption valid grounds for conviction.

Presumption of corruption in certain cases
8. Where in any proceedings against a person for an offence under section 5 or 6, it is proved that any gratification has been paid or given to or received by a person in the employment of the Government or any department thereof or of a public body by or from a person or agent of a person who has or seeks to have any dealing with the Government or any department thereof or any public body, that gratification shall be deemed to have been paid or given and received corruptly as an inducement or reward as herein before mentioned unless the contrary is proved.

[janet88]

The plot thickens…

Gay has good time with ONE woman and already busy enough…but the other SCDF fella had good time with 3 women right?

[Lilac66]

Way2GO:

Lilac66:

Heard you've collected?

heard fr who? :nunchuk:
me do like Ben&Jerry ice-cream,
but I m not gay leh.

Sorli sorli har :booboo:
The one who collected was a Ready2GO


....who likes Ben & Jerry , is always gay and lively. :imanangel:

[Scorpion]

Way2GO:

Daddy

Defense lawyer is out to prove C and Gay had an affair, and apart from personal indiscretion, Gay is not corrupt.


Simi logic? :? Still conflict of interest right?
:siao:

Conflict of interest is present.
PCA Chp 241, Part III, para 8 makes presumption of corruption valid grounds for conviction.

Presumption of corruption in certain cases
8. Where in any proceedings against a person for an offence under section 5 or 6, it is proved that any gratification has been paid or given to or received by a person in the employment of the Government or any department thereof or of a public body by or from a person or agent of a person who has or seeks to have any dealing with the Government or any department thereof or any public body, that gratification shall be deemed to have been paid or given and received corruptly as an inducement or reward as herein before mentioned unless the contrary is proved.

Sorry ah, I'm a normal salesperson, not so smart.....hahaha....

Am I understanding correctly, or does the above imply that the giver/receiver is guilty, unless proven otherwise?

[Way2GO]

u r not so blur

dis clause 8 closes a loophole n enables d prosecution to only prove dat bribe/gratification was given n received, n there was potential conflict of interest when it happened.
In d eyes of law, its immaterial if its EMA, sex not consummated blah dah dah.

Sidenote: d law was also amended to make BJ a chargeable offence unless it leads to consummation. More popcorn? :nailbite:

[Way2GO]

Lilac66:

Sorli sorli har :booboo:

The one who collected was a Ready2GO


....who likes Ben & Jerry , is always gay and lively. :imanangel:

who is Ready2GO?
:rant: :nunchuk: :nunchuk:
me will accept my DS2 is gay as in happy!

[Scorpion]

Way2GO:

u r not so blur

dis clause 8 closes a loophole n enables d prosecution to only prove dat bribe/gratification was given n received, n there was potential conflict of interest when it happened.
In d eyes of law, its immaterial if its EMA, sex not consummated blah dah dah.

Sidenote: d law was also amended to make BJ a chargeable offence unless it leads to consummation. More popcorn? :nailbite:

This leads to even more confusion, because now I'm thinking that the strategy of Gay's side was to show that there was a long-term affair between the them prior to the tender award, therefore whatever intimacy happened between them was normal and unrelated to business. I was then expecting Gay's side to come up with justifications on why the tender was awarded (eg. lowest price, best compliance to specs, etc).

But now, it seems that even if they managed to prove that there was an affair, it would be useless - since there was giving/receiving + conflict of interest.

This makes me wonder why they're spending so much time seemingly trying to prove that there was an affair, since Cecilia is not the one being charged anyway. In my simple salesperson mind, I'm thinking \"heck, there is no doubt now that these things did happen + conflict of interest, so we can make a decision and close the case\".

Unless, they're setting up the stage to charge Cecilia too.....

Sorry ah....am I making sense?



Oh, I thought they changed (or at least wanted to change) the law to allow BJ and other related non-consummation stuff, as long as it was in private between consenting adults. Maybe they didn't after all. Unless they really wanted to throw the book at someone, I doubt anyone will be charged for this anyway.

[Way2GO]

Scorpion:

Oh, I thought they changed (or at least wanted to change) the law to allow BJ and other related non-consummation stuff, as long as it was in private between consenting adults. Maybe they didn't after all. Unless they really wanted to throw the book at someone, I doubt anyone will be charged for this anyway.

They did amend d law to be more forgiving of consensual sxx.
Previously those stuff u mentioned were considered as unnatural acts n is a chargeable offence in d archaic law.
Its amended form allows for such acts as foreplay if it leads to sxx inter....
They r not going to police dis under normal circumstances bwt married spouses.
But d law is there, d rest is only a matter whether u suay or not.