- Joined
- Jul 19, 2011
- Messages
- 27,901
- Points
- 113
SINGAPORE - Ms Darinne Ko struck a deal with the Corrupt Investigation Bureau (CPIB) deputy director of investigations Teng Khee Fatt over her statements to implicate her law professor Tey Tsun Hang, reported RazorTV.
She recounted her interrogation by the CPIB officer during a cross-examination by her former professor.
She said that she had been pressured into agreeing with CPIB on her statement after being told by Mr Teng that she could also be charged for corruption. She said that he had told her: "It was not possible for a girl to buy a guy a gift."
She added, "He told me that I wasn't cooperating because the evidence I gave them was not making out the elements of the charge against Prof Tey.
"He then told me that corruption was two-sided offence, and he could very well decide to charge me instead.
"However, if I cooperated with him, he would ask the prosecution to ask the court to grant me indemnity if the need arose.
"I further said that I could not cooperate with his definition of cooperation, because my statements would not hold up to cross-examination.
"Then he said that it would be possible for him to ask the prosecution to solely use my statement without calling me to testify, and if I cooperated, I would be able to carry on with my life and begin my career upon graduation."
She then agreed that she had given in to some of Mr Teng's demands, but refused to write that she had given her professor the gifts and had sex with him because she had wanted favours from him.
She also said that she did not require any favours from any of her professors.
Mr Teng finally suggested that she say that she had given him the gifts so that she would not be "unduly prejudiced" if she took his modules in the future.
Ms Ko obliged as she felt the term meant that she would not be treated unfairly, and she was more comfortable with this compromise, even though it was not an accurate depiction of the true state of affairs.
She added that when she was locked up by the CPIB, she was latched from the outside in a room for close to 12 hours, and though she was given food and water, she was not allowed to sleep. She added she had only slept for 3 1/ 2 hours in the last 30 hours.
She also said that no statement was recorded until she had a 2 1/ 2 hour conversation with Mr Teng.
Her first statement was recorded on April 3 at 2.30am before she was released. A month later on May 4, she requested to have her earlier statement amended.
This time she said that she had bought the gift for her professor because she had wanted him to like her more than a normal student as she had a crush on him.
She added that her earlier statements were different because she felt pressured into believing that she needed indemnity from the court.
She was initially thought to be the prosecution's key witness, but now the prosecution has applied to impeach her.
They pointed out that there have been numerous discrepancies in her court testimony and CPIB statements.
She recounted her interrogation by the CPIB officer during a cross-examination by her former professor.
She said that she had been pressured into agreeing with CPIB on her statement after being told by Mr Teng that she could also be charged for corruption. She said that he had told her: "It was not possible for a girl to buy a guy a gift."
She added, "He told me that I wasn't cooperating because the evidence I gave them was not making out the elements of the charge against Prof Tey.
"He then told me that corruption was two-sided offence, and he could very well decide to charge me instead.
"However, if I cooperated with him, he would ask the prosecution to ask the court to grant me indemnity if the need arose.
"I further said that I could not cooperate with his definition of cooperation, because my statements would not hold up to cross-examination.
"Then he said that it would be possible for him to ask the prosecution to solely use my statement without calling me to testify, and if I cooperated, I would be able to carry on with my life and begin my career upon graduation."
She then agreed that she had given in to some of Mr Teng's demands, but refused to write that she had given her professor the gifts and had sex with him because she had wanted favours from him.
She also said that she did not require any favours from any of her professors.
Mr Teng finally suggested that she say that she had given him the gifts so that she would not be "unduly prejudiced" if she took his modules in the future.
Ms Ko obliged as she felt the term meant that she would not be treated unfairly, and she was more comfortable with this compromise, even though it was not an accurate depiction of the true state of affairs.
She added that when she was locked up by the CPIB, she was latched from the outside in a room for close to 12 hours, and though she was given food and water, she was not allowed to sleep. She added she had only slept for 3 1/ 2 hours in the last 30 hours.
She also said that no statement was recorded until she had a 2 1/ 2 hour conversation with Mr Teng.
Her first statement was recorded on April 3 at 2.30am before she was released. A month later on May 4, she requested to have her earlier statement amended.
This time she said that she had bought the gift for her professor because she had wanted him to like her more than a normal student as she had a crush on him.
She added that her earlier statements were different because she felt pressured into believing that she needed indemnity from the court.
She was initially thought to be the prosecution's key witness, but now the prosecution has applied to impeach her.
They pointed out that there have been numerous discrepancies in her court testimony and CPIB statements.
