A win for Iris koh

fuck the cheebai, calls his own credibility into question. Judge should throw this whole fucking case out the window.
 
Last edited:
TIP, more on 'I', which is inducement, and the form of the inducement is bail.
Means loctor accussed polis that the polis forced him to agree to something before he is allowed bail?

But why would a judge think that, is more convincing to say I can't leecall? :thumbsdown: :eek:
Wtf now I need to think of how to beat the judge to puppy liao.
 
So the case is about loctor accusing polis orhweesir for inducing loctor to sabo iris.

Any final verdict you can find?
KNN, told you already. A "trial within a trial" is like your smart TV picture in picture. It's a side show to decide on some evidential matter. Now that it has been settled, and the statements are deemed admissible, they will meet for the actual trial. Where got verdict ?
 
KNN, told you already. A "trial within a trial" is like your smart TV picture in picture. It's a side show to decide on some evidential matter. Now that it has been settled, and the statements are deemed admissible, they will meet for the actual trial. Where got verdict ?
Means have to wait for iris case to Ft then this can continue with extra time cum penalty shootout or this case will never have a Ft and polis bo taichi auto Ft?
 
KNN, told you already. A "trial within a trial" is like your smart TV picture in picture. It's a side show to decide on some evidential matter. Now that it has been settled, and the statements are deemed admissible, they will meet for the actual trial. Where got verdict ?
Actually when inside the polis station, if they turn off leecording, is no longer a lawful place I.e suka yee gong.

So it will quite a silly idea for loctor to raise a case without any proof de woh.
 
Means have to wait for iris case to Ft then this can continue with extra time cum penalty shootout or this case will never have a Ft and polis bo taichi auto Ft?
There is only ONE case for 2 trials - one big one small. Halfway through the big one, Dr's lawyer challenged the admissibility of 6 statements made to the police during interrogation. So the Court convened a small trial to decide on this matter. It's called a trial within a trial. Now that the small trial is over, they will continue with the big trial. It's the same case.

Catch got ball or not ?​
 
Actually when inside the polis station, if they turn off leecording, is no longer a lawful place I.e suka yee gong.

So it will quite a silly idea for loctor to raise a case without any proof de woh.
Only sexual cases got video recording. Not for all cases.
 
There is only ONE case for 2 trials - one big one small. Halfway through the big one, Dr's lawyer challenged the admissibility of 6 statements made to the police during interrogation. So the Court convened a small trial to decide on this matter. It's called a trial within a trial. Now that the small trial is over, they will continue with the big trial. It's the same case.

Catch got ball or not ?​
Am I right to say, it means
The big case was about loctor quah tio charged for giving false vaccinations cert.
Then loctor opened another sub case, accusing polis for inducing him to sabo iris.
Then now the judge thinks that polis statement of "I don't leecall" sounded more convincing, so he closed this small case and polis now bo taichi.

Then some other time, the big case will continue?

Ann née kuan lai gong
I think loctor was just trying to buy time to delay the bigger case, as he probably will know his accusation has no proved, but he chose to do something that most likely going to be fruitless.
 
Am I right to say, it means
The big case was about loctor quah tio charged for giving false vaccinations cert.
Then loctor opened another sub case, accusing polis for inducing him to sabo iris.
Then now the judge thinks that polis statement of "I don't leecall" sounded more convincing, so he closed this small case and polis now bo taichi.

Then some other time, the big case will continue?

Ann née kuan lai gong
I think loctor was just trying to buy time to delay the bigger case, as he probably will know his accusation has no proved, but he chose to do something that most likely going to be fruitless.
No big case or small case. It's ONE case, 2 separate hearings.

The 6 statements that were being challenged were not just for implicating Iris. There were statements naming the patients who received the fake jabs.
 
No big case or small case. It's ONE case, 2 separate hearings.

The 6 statements that were being challenged were not just for implicating Iris. There were statements naming the patients who received the fake jabs.
Can they leecall all those patient and do a mrna test on them rather than use mouth talk?
Anti vax expert says the poison will forever be inside the body de woh
 
What is a mRNA test ? What is your point ?
The best way to prove if those patents did leelee took fake vaccine or the real stuff.

If they had taken the real jab, the poison will forever be found inside the body mah according to experts anti vaxer.
 
The best way to prove if those patents did leelee took fake vaccine or the real stuff.

If they had taken the real jab, the poison will forever be found inside the body mah according to experts anti vaxer.
The Dr's lawyer did NOT challenge the statements because he thought they were untrue.

It's the procedural fairness in obtaining evidence. - 程序正義.
 
The Dr's lawyer did NOT challenge the statements because he thought they were untrue.

It's the procedural fairness in obtaining evidence. - 程序正義.
What I mean is that
At the time when moh accused loctor giving saline vaccine, either the loctor or the moh or the proscutor should be doing a spike protein test for all the patients involved. If loctor had leelee given the real stuff, he will have nothing to hide. Same for the patients.
That period was still a good period for the test, but now it could be waned after many years.

Why didn't they do the test and talk later, instead of charging loctor with mouth talking?
 
What I mean is that
At the time when moh accused loctor giving saline vaccine, either the loctor or the moh or the proscutor should be doing a spike protein test for all the patients involved. If loctor had leelee given the real stuff, he will have nothing to hide. Same for the patients.
That period was still a good period for the test, but now it could be waned after many years.

Why didn't they do the test and talk later, instead of charging loctor with mouth talking?
I have already said that in the context of trial within a trial, the Dr's lawyer did NOT challenge the statements because he thought it was untrue. I'm not saying that "because he thought it was untrue, that's why he challenged."

In other words, the Dr's lawyer wasn't interested in whether the statements were true or untrue. It's was the procedure of obtaining evidence that he felt was unfair, and it was the unfairness he was challenging.
 
Back
Top