• 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.

Dishonest "ahpunehneh" looses court case against Novena Church

limpeh

Alfrescian
Loyal
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking+News/Singapore/Story/STIStory_338005.html


Woman loses exorcism case
By Selina Lum

The High Court dismissed Madam Amutha Valli Krishnan's claim that the defendants are to blamed for causing her psychological trauma that has left her unable to lead a normal life. -- ST PHOTO: WANG HUI FEN

THE WOMAN who sued the Novena Church, two priests and six church-goers over what she described as an exorcism, has lost her case.
In a 59-page written judgment released on Friday, the High Court dismissed Madam Amutha Valli Krishnan's claim that the defendants are to blamed for causing her psychological trauma that has left her unable to lead a normal life.

The striking feature of the case is that the versions put forward by Madam Valli and her family on the one side, stands in stark contrast to the accounts of the defendants and their witnesses.

After analysing the evidence, Justice Lee Seiu Kin accepted the defendants' version and gave five broad reasons for his decision.

It boiled down to: demeanour and consistency of the witnesses on both sides; dubious evidence of Madam Valli's witnesses; contradiction of her case with contemporaneous documents; attempts by her and her husband to conceal evidence; and strong evidence corroborating the version of the defendants.

In the end, he found that the defendants did not cause her to suffer post-traumatic disorder.

The judge still noted that the one thing psychiatrists from both sides could agree upon is that she is 'very ill'.

But it is not a question for the court to answer how best she can be treated.
 

VIBGYOR

Alfrescian
Loyal
ya man....Heaven fury haven start yet....maybe mr S A Tan can help redeem her:biggrin:

you mean something like this?

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AL8Kl-8H9k8&hl=de&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AL8Kl-8H9k8&hl=de&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
 
Top