Former SCDF and CNB chiefs arrested
-
friendship:
you're right!the elderly man in the car must be her father.
This EMA is a real wasting time, wrong woman, wrong man, wrong professional, wrong timing.
this prosecution case is weak. In fact, there is no case at all.
what we audience heard so far for past 5 eventful court days of hearing is ...
at the very most, only prove that one married man and a married woman are unfaithful, commit adultery. That's about it. But couldn't prove any criminal $ corruption involved so far.
the court is awaiting them to nail each other.
but she deploy smart strategy!
if she can't convince the court, she confuse the Judge.
ultimately, only both of them know the Truth.
How can the Judge decide what to sentence then ?
throw the case out of court ?
she is the key witness. -
Her motive to confuse the judge, she is not afraid the arrow will turn back to her?
There is no evidence in the corruption part yet. -
On d contrary, I for wan m thankful dat NBG claimed trial to fight his case in court for d public will become better informed n wiser whatever d verdict for a few interesting points.
1. In previous cases, money was involved. Money trail is traceable n produced as hard evidence in court to nail d accused often with d collaboration of usually d giver of d bribe. In dis case, there is no money trail, only allegedly sex given in return for influence in commercial contracts. How to prove dis?
D key witness is pivotal to establish dis fact but d key witness has now turned ‘hostile’ to jeopardize d prosecution case.
2. Dis case will test d law’s interpretation n application of clause 8 in PCA, Chp 241, Part III which states, quote
\"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. \" unquote.
Dis clause thus presumed dat d receiver is guilty of an offence unless he proves otherwise.
If dis clause is stringently applied, most in d civil service wld prolly fall into d net if they choose not to recuse themselves from potential conflict of interest.
NBG is fighting for a lesser charge of 'personal indiscretion' instead of corruption.
3. Given NBG’s professional background, he wld hv had access to d previous ‘similar personal indiscretion’ cases which were dealt with internally n nvr went to open court. He cld hv felt aggrieved at being charged for an offence where he thot he had his bases covered, n now calculated he has a fair shot at fighting d corruption charge at least to save his reputation of integrity.
IMHO, dis case is not a waste of time.
Whatever d verdict, it wld hv served its purpose of making d public aware, if they hv not known it previously, of an oft overlooked PCA, Chp 241, clause 8.
d case has its value in reminding those in d civil service to be on their guard. -
MR06:
Keke must lure them to defend themselves.... the more players the merrier
Haiya.... We finished the story then tell them mah.....Imami:
[quote=\"MR06\"]
limlim, you had made a grand entrance at http://www.kiasuparents.com/kiasu/forum/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=41684&start=250
Have fun....
[/quote]prefer to \"see no evil\", \"hear no evil\".. :evil: :evil:
-
Meritocracy vs Holistic.
-
The whole case is about office politics- the higher you go and the more people will take you down. as u know in any organisation, this is a zero sum game. someone have to move out which, many waiting for opportunity for the head to make "mistake" which is EMA. the alleged corruption is wholly to tarnish the image not financial transaction like bank account to proof. the prosceution case is to prove tangible benefit or benefit in kind ie sleeping with someone which is hard to justify like your word vs my word.
the best part there is no Hotel involved or all happen inside the car or carpark.
This is very common in the private sector, where subordinate or vendor sleep with the "boss" or ""key person for career advancement and pay. in short, do anything but dont get caught or leave audit trail. someone at the top must have know about this EMA thing or turn a blind eye, maybe now is the timining to exercise it for a change for restructuring.
furthermore, the EMA event took place in 2009, 2010 why now, to make a big fuss. who is the biggest winner? think about it. -
phtthp:
you're right!friendship:
the elderly man in the car must be her father.
This EMA is a real wasting time, wrong woman, wrong man, wrong professional, wrong timing.
this prosecution case is weak. In fact, there is no case at all.
what we audience heard so far for past 5 eventful court days of hearing is ...
at the very most, only prove that one married man and a married woman are unfaithful, commit adultery. That's about it. But couldn't prove any criminal $ corruption involved so far.
the court is awaiting them to nail each other.
but she deploy smart strategy!
if she can't convince the court, she confuse the Judge.
ultimately, only both of them know the Truth.
How can the Judge decide what to sentence then ?
throw the case out of court ?
she is the key witness.
That's why the Spore jurisdiction system do away with the jury panel... :evil: -
macrotrust:
if that particular whistle blower biggest winner is some senior Office politics player trying to smear, harm & ruin Ah Gay reputation but in the end - Ah Gay is Not guilty of $ corruption (at most unfaithfulness), does that mean Gay can still remain in the civil service but will be deployed to another ministry; definitely not his last ministry where they train dogs to sniff drugs ? Surely Justice must prevail ?The whole case is about office politics- the higher you go and the more people will take you down. as u know in any organisation, this is a zero sum game. someone have to move out which, many waiting for opportunity for the head to make \"mistake\" which is EMA. the alleged corruption is wholly to tarnish the image not financial transaction like bank account to proof. the prosceution case is to prove tangible benefit or benefit in kind ie sleeping with someone which is hard to justify like your word vs my word.
the best part there is no Hotel involved or all happen inside the car or carpark.
This is very common in the private sector, where subordinate or vendor sleep with the \"boss\" or \"\"key person for career advancement and pay. in short, do anything but dont get caught or leave audit trail. someone at the top must have know about this EMA thing or turn a blind eye, maybe now is the timining to exercise it for a change for restructuring.
furthermore, the EMA event took place in 2009, 2010 why now, to make a big fuss. who is the biggest winner? think about it. -
Even if Ah gay is found not gulity of corruption, how can he continue to work in the civil service- he already breach his professional code of conduct and ethics. who will respect him in the civil service. his career is over- can u imagine washing your dirty linen in the public who would dare to employ him if such incident happen again. no employer would take such a risk with such person. maybe work overseas and come back to singapore later.
the verdict is clear, no case to answer given the witness is hostile and will be impeached for perjury ie meaning lying under oath to perverse the course of justice. -
macrotrust:
Even if Ah gay is found not gulity of corruption, how can he continue to work in the civil service- he already breach his professional code of conduct and ethics. who will respect him in the civil service. his career is over- can u imagine washing your dirty linen in the public who would dare to employ him if such incident happen again. no employer would take such a risk with such person. maybe work overseas and come back to singapore later.
the verdict is clear, no case to answer given the witness is hostile and will be impeached for perjury ie meaning lying under oath to perverse the course of justice.
Ya... that's life... 一子錯 滿盤皆落索.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login