- Joined
- Jul 19, 2011
- Messages
- 27,891
- Points
- 113
SINGAPORE - CPIB Director Teng Khee Fat and law professor Tey Tsun Hang disagreed about the April 5, 2012 meeting when Mr Teng took to the witness stand for the first time on Jan 21, day eight of the trial.
Tey told the court on Monday that he had knelt before CPIB director Teng Khee Fatt out of desperation when they met in Mr Teng's office on April 5. Prof Tey said he had showed Teng a $2,500 cheque in his chequebook and asked him to show it to Darinne Ko, the intended recipient of the cheque, and find out for himself what her response would be.
However, Mr Teng denied that Tey had told him about this.
Professor Tey told the court that at the meeting he was in such a desperate state that he was sobbing, crying uncontrollably and kneeling before Teng and pleading with him in Chinese, "Please have some mercy on him."
Mr Teng again denied that the above incident had taken place.
Mr Teng also revealed that he had been promoted to deputy director of CPIB's special investigations branch last April - the same month that the investigation into Tey's case was under way.
Mr Teng said he did not meet Tey on April 2 when the latter was first picked up by CPIB. He was only briefed about the status of the investigation.
He maintained that did not ask for Tey to be handcuffed at the hospital and ordered Tey to be released unconditionally when Tey was warded. He also did not instruct officers to pick Tey up from hospital on subsequent days.
Earlier in the day, CPIB special investigator Mr Michael Oh said in court that he was the one who instructed his colleague Hasvind Elangovan, another CPIB special investigator, to handcuff Tey to his hospital bed when the professor was admitted to A&E.
His explanation: "At that point in time, Tey was under our arrest and in our custody, we're responsible for his safety. The medical officer will need to check him without our presence, that's why I instructed that Tey be handcuffed."
This contradicted his senior colleage Wilson Khoo's previous testimony in court. Khoo had said his team decided to handcuff Tey to the bed for some three hours at the request of a nurse who told them to do so as she was concerned about the safety of her staff. The officer who was present, Hasvind Elangovan also gave the same reason.
Mr Teng said he knew only knew Tey had returned to CPIB to record the statement with chief investigation officer Bay Chun How after he was discharged from the hospital when he saw Tey in Mr Bay's office that day.
Mr Tey asked him: "Didn't it occur to you, that seeing a person in patient's clothing, to request Mr Bay to stop the recording?"
Mr Teng said he did not want to interrupt the session.
Mr Teng also claimed that it was Tey who requested to meet him twice that same evening. First, to complain that Mr Bay was impatient with him and subsequently to show him his chequebook.
Tey had his first two statements recorded by Wilson Khoo and Bay Chun How that day on April 5. He had his third statement recorded by Wilson Khoo on April 10. More than a month later on May 17, he was summoned to CPIB again to have his fourth statement recorded by Mr Teng himself as Mr Teng thought that his junior officers had not clarified certain issues with Tey. Mr Teng went on to record two more statements from Tey on May 18 and May 24.
When the prosecution asked Mr Teng why he had taken more than six hours to record Tey's fourth statement, he said he had a long list of exhibits to verify with Tey.
When Mr Teng was asked to explain why Tey had remained in his office for close to three hours after the completion of Tey's fifth statement, he said it was because Tey had to read the statements carefully before signing it.
Tey told the court on Monday that he had knelt before CPIB director Teng Khee Fatt out of desperation when they met in Mr Teng's office on April 5. Prof Tey said he had showed Teng a $2,500 cheque in his chequebook and asked him to show it to Darinne Ko, the intended recipient of the cheque, and find out for himself what her response would be.
However, Mr Teng denied that Tey had told him about this.
Professor Tey told the court that at the meeting he was in such a desperate state that he was sobbing, crying uncontrollably and kneeling before Teng and pleading with him in Chinese, "Please have some mercy on him."
Mr Teng again denied that the above incident had taken place.
Mr Teng also revealed that he had been promoted to deputy director of CPIB's special investigations branch last April - the same month that the investigation into Tey's case was under way.
Mr Teng said he did not meet Tey on April 2 when the latter was first picked up by CPIB. He was only briefed about the status of the investigation.
He maintained that did not ask for Tey to be handcuffed at the hospital and ordered Tey to be released unconditionally when Tey was warded. He also did not instruct officers to pick Tey up from hospital on subsequent days.
Earlier in the day, CPIB special investigator Mr Michael Oh said in court that he was the one who instructed his colleague Hasvind Elangovan, another CPIB special investigator, to handcuff Tey to his hospital bed when the professor was admitted to A&E.
His explanation: "At that point in time, Tey was under our arrest and in our custody, we're responsible for his safety. The medical officer will need to check him without our presence, that's why I instructed that Tey be handcuffed."
This contradicted his senior colleage Wilson Khoo's previous testimony in court. Khoo had said his team decided to handcuff Tey to the bed for some three hours at the request of a nurse who told them to do so as she was concerned about the safety of her staff. The officer who was present, Hasvind Elangovan also gave the same reason.
Mr Teng said he knew only knew Tey had returned to CPIB to record the statement with chief investigation officer Bay Chun How after he was discharged from the hospital when he saw Tey in Mr Bay's office that day.
Mr Tey asked him: "Didn't it occur to you, that seeing a person in patient's clothing, to request Mr Bay to stop the recording?"
Mr Teng said he did not want to interrupt the session.
Mr Teng also claimed that it was Tey who requested to meet him twice that same evening. First, to complain that Mr Bay was impatient with him and subsequently to show him his chequebook.
Tey had his first two statements recorded by Wilson Khoo and Bay Chun How that day on April 5. He had his third statement recorded by Wilson Khoo on April 10. More than a month later on May 17, he was summoned to CPIB again to have his fourth statement recorded by Mr Teng himself as Mr Teng thought that his junior officers had not clarified certain issues with Tey. Mr Teng went on to record two more statements from Tey on May 18 and May 24.
When the prosecution asked Mr Teng why he had taken more than six hours to record Tey's fourth statement, he said he had a long list of exhibits to verify with Tey.
When Mr Teng was asked to explain why Tey had remained in his office for close to three hours after the completion of Tey's fifth statement, he said it was because Tey had to read the statements carefully before signing it.
