all fronts very quiet 
-
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.
Liew Mun Leong Billion Dollars Temasek Reputation Has Been Rubbished
- Thread starter GUDANGARAM
- Start date
all fronts very quiet
there goes the Parti...
see :
Dear Mr Lingam, I thought parliament will discuss this issue but so far there is no follow up. Any reason ? Mr Shiok, would you pls send a reminder to Singapore government and request them to follow up with any further delay ? Thank you for following up this matter and pls let us feel shiok!!!!!
The adjournment motion on Parti Liyani case was not selected by the Speaker in early Oct 2020.The case will come up in early Nov 2020 when the Law Minister
Sham will give the ministerial statement in parliament on the Parti Liyani case and followed by questions from MPs on the equity of the criminal justice system in
Singapore.
Somebody is buying time to clean up the rubbish. Let it simmers for a while and hoping that the public to forget about this issue.
They are banking on that sinkees are stupid and have short memory and too occupied in earning a living and the matter will fade away.
It takes a foreign domestic worker to wave the flag.
For us.
For us.
No, they know very well that sinkies has no ball to pursue the issue.
Karl Liew, son of former Changi Airport Group chairman Liew Mun Leong, is seen limping as he leaves the bail centre at the State Courts on Thursday (Nov 5).
He was charged with lying while testifying during the trial involving former domestic worker Parti Liyani, and for lying to a police officer.
For more: https://tdy.sg/2Gt5BOA
They should have gone for the father and mother instead of the son.
Parti Liyani seeks compensation from AGC for 'frivolous or vexatious' prosecution, first person to do so
Ms Parti Liyani is the first person to be making an application for compensation under Section 359(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code.PHOTO: ST FILE
Selina Lum
Law Correspondent
SINGAPORE - Former domestic worker Parti Liyani, an Indonesian who was acquitted in a high-profile case last year of stealing from her then employer, is making an unprecedented bid to seek compensation from the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC).
She is the first person to be making an application for compensation under Section 359(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, which was introduced in 2010, prosecutors told the High Court on Friday (April 16).
The provision states that if an accused is acquitted of any charge, and if the court is satisfied that the prosecution was frivolous or vexatious, the court may order a compensation sum of up to $10,000.
Ms Parti was originally accused of stealing more than $50,000 worth of items from the family of prominent businessman Liew Mun Leong.
She was found guilty by a district court and sentenced to 26 months’ jail, but was acquitted by High Court judge Chan Seng Onn last September on appeal.
On Friday, appearing before Justice Chan on the issue of compensation, Ms Parti’s lawyer, Mr Anil Balchandani, raised numerous grounds to argue that the decision to prosecute her was frivolous or vexatious.
Mr Balchandani said the prosecution failed to verify that the last day of the maid’s employment was in fact Oct 27, 2016, and not Oct 28 as stated in court by Mr Liew and Ms Parti.
He contended that the prosecution should not have gone ahead with the charges as it was aware that the police had been slow in seizing the items from Mr Liew’s house.
He took issue with how prosecutors “nitpicked” by repeatedly questioning Ms Parti in court on whether a particular item cost $2.50 or $2.80.
He contended that the prosecution withheld evidence on the functionality of a DVD player.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Mohamed Faizal Mohamed Abdul Kadir argued that Ms Parti’s application must be dismissed as her arguments fell “woefully short of showing that the decision to prosecute was frivolous or vexatious”.
He argued that there was more than sufficient justification for the decision to prosecute Ms Parti. This included the accounts from the Liews and Ms Parti’s own admission that she had taken some items without consent.
He said what Mr Balchandani did was to go through 3,699 pages of court transcripts and point out where things went wrong. This can be done with any acquittal, and even any conviction, said Mr Faizal.
Selina Lum
Law Correspondent
- PUBLISHED
APR 16, 2021, 2:54 PM SGT
SINGAPORE - Former domestic worker Parti Liyani, an Indonesian who was acquitted in a high-profile case last year of stealing from her then employer, is making an unprecedented bid to seek compensation from the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC).
She is the first person to be making an application for compensation under Section 359(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, which was introduced in 2010, prosecutors told the High Court on Friday (April 16).
The provision states that if an accused is acquitted of any charge, and if the court is satisfied that the prosecution was frivolous or vexatious, the court may order a compensation sum of up to $10,000.
Ms Parti was originally accused of stealing more than $50,000 worth of items from the family of prominent businessman Liew Mun Leong.
She was found guilty by a district court and sentenced to 26 months’ jail, but was acquitted by High Court judge Chan Seng Onn last September on appeal.
On Friday, appearing before Justice Chan on the issue of compensation, Ms Parti’s lawyer, Mr Anil Balchandani, raised numerous grounds to argue that the decision to prosecute her was frivolous or vexatious.
Mr Balchandani said the prosecution failed to verify that the last day of the maid’s employment was in fact Oct 27, 2016, and not Oct 28 as stated in court by Mr Liew and Ms Parti.
He contended that the prosecution should not have gone ahead with the charges as it was aware that the police had been slow in seizing the items from Mr Liew’s house.
He took issue with how prosecutors “nitpicked” by repeatedly questioning Ms Parti in court on whether a particular item cost $2.50 or $2.80.
He contended that the prosecution withheld evidence on the functionality of a DVD player.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Mohamed Faizal Mohamed Abdul Kadir argued that Ms Parti’s application must be dismissed as her arguments fell “woefully short of showing that the decision to prosecute was frivolous or vexatious”.
He argued that there was more than sufficient justification for the decision to prosecute Ms Parti. This included the accounts from the Liews and Ms Parti’s own admission that she had taken some items without consent.
He said what Mr Balchandani did was to go through 3,699 pages of court transcripts and point out where things went wrong. This can be done with any acquittal, and even any conviction, said Mr Faizal.
Last edited:
Similar threads
