Hi Kukubird,
An instant reply is always a good sign - welcome comrade - we are both PAP IB. I wasn't in the Court to observe proceedings and am sure you weren't either. So, what the public gets is second hand knowledge as reported by the media, which is of course Government controlled. I get my news on this exciting, tintillating, etc sexcapade from Channel News Asia's website and the link is here:
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1248002/1/.html
I also noticed that the contents keep changing from day to day. Report first and check later? That's bad. Lousy journalistic standards. Adjust contents in response to unfavourable comments on the Internet? Why, that's criminal! Anyway, I will comment on the contents in the next post, but below is the cut-and-paste of the full article as it appears on Chanel News Asia's website as at 12.34 pm Singapore time:
Prosecution witness tells court Tey didn't ask for gifts
By Claire Huang | Posted: 15 January 2013 1121 hrs
SINGAPORE: National University of Singapore law professor Tey Tsun Hang, 41, on trial for corruption in a sex-for-grades case said he had paid for the gifts he received from his former student, Ms Darinne Ko.
Tey, who said this on Day 4 of the hearing on Tuesday, also produced cheque book entries in court.
This came after 23-year-old Ms Ko, the prosecution's star witness, told the court about two CYC tailored shirts and an iPod touch.
She said at no point did Tey ask for the gifts from her and that she had given them to him on her own accord.
Tey put it to Ms Ko that he had paid her for those gifts, as well as for the dinner at Garibaldi, which had a bill dated 21 July 2010.
He said he had issued a cheque amounting to S$2,500 in July 2010 before she left for an overseas study stint.
This amount, he said, is slightly more than the value of the gifts mentioned in the first four charges.
But Ms Ko said no such cheque was given to her.
"Based on my recollection no such cheque was given to me. That's different from whether I even remember that a cheque was given to me," replied Ms Ko.
Tey's move drew strong objections from lead prosecutor Andre Jumabhoy, who said the only reason why he is showing Ms Ko his cheque book entries is to "colour the evidence."
"And that to make the submission, puts the cart before the horse," he said.
This drew Tey's rebuttal that Mr Jumabhoy is insinuating that he is seeking to coach Ms Ko in her testimony. Tey said: "I do not think Ms Ko is so naive to be coached as a witness under oath."
After arguing for more than 30 minutes, Chief District Judge Tan Siong Thye allowed Tey's questioning but he warned that there should not be contamination of the exhibits.
Continuing his line of questioning, Tey then said he made out the cheque to Ms Ko but she did not encash it. So he paid her in cash, he said. This would explain a second cheque book entry he made to indicate that, said Tey.
Ms Ko disagreed to both claims.
To support his case, Tey asked the court to make an order for two tests to be conducted - the first, a forensic ink dating test, the other, a handwriting comparison analysis.
"The first four charges tally up to slightly less than S$2,500. The two cheque book entries indicate in the defendant's own handwriting "DWH Ko". Both cheque book entries indicate the same amount - $2,500," said Tey.
He said one of the entries was dated July 2010 and the forensic ink dating test and handwriting analysis would "prove conclusively" that the entries are made by him. It would also prove that they were "written contemporaneously" around or in the period of July 2010 and not "recent concoctions".
Tey also asked for disclosure of his DBS bank account information to prove that Ms Ko did not encash the cheque.
Another reason cited by Tey for his three requests - that the forensic tests cost more than S$50,000. Given his suspension since late July 2012, Tey said he is "not in a position" to engage an overseas expert.
Mr Jumabhoy objected, saying Tey's application "is little more than a smoke screen, designed to distract the court from the impact" of what Ms Ko had said.
Mr Jumabhoy also raised doubts, pointing out that the cheque was dated early July 2, 2010, while the dinner bill was dated July 21.
He said Tey is purporting to pay for a dinner even before it had taken place. "It shows a remarkable ability on his part to establish not only future events but the price that such events entail," said Mr Jumabhoy.
The prosecutor also argued that Ms Ko's testimony that she did not receive the cheque caused "irreparable damage" to Tey's case.
"...She has denied in no uncertain terms, (a) having received the cheque and (b) having not encashed the cheque and subsequently been paid for in cash by this accused," argued Mr Jumabhoy.
The judge denied Tey's request after many barbs were traded.
Later in the day, CPIB officer Png Chen Chen also took to the stand as the prosecution's second witness. She told the court that Ms Ko had voluntarily given her statements to the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau.
The court heard that Ms Ko told Ms Png that she expected Tey to protect her and not give her a failing grade as he was her boyfriend. But during cross-examination, Tey pointed out that this was not likely as Ms Ko's average grade at NUS was a "B".
During the prosecution's questioning, Ms Png said Ms Ko was the one who revealed voluntarily to the CPIB that four other former students had given Tey gifts. Of the four, two are current Assistant Registrars at the Supreme Court -- Mr Colin Seow and Ms Elaine Chew.
Tey, a former district judge, faces six allegations of obtaining gratification in the form of gifts and sex from Ms Ko between May and July 2010, in exchange for lifting her grades.
If convicted, he could be jailed up to five years and fined S$100,000.