- Joined
- Aug 20, 2022
- Messages
- 26,649
- Points
- 113
This thread got many legally trained professionals



Andy Lau ?The Court is under no legal or evidential requirement to regard the testimony of one co-accused against another with suspicion. Any resulting prejudice is properly addressed by the affected co-accused through cross-examination.![]()
In other words, I expect SC Tan and his team to come out guns blazing, Clint Eastwood–style, and to blow the co-accused’s credibility to pieces.
I use Google AI modeThis thread got many legally trained professionals![]()
![]()
Andy Lau ?
When I was a kid, I was inspired by the movie 法外情 法内情Andy looks more like 'N' level ... handsome 'N' level. He lacks that wu takchek look of a lawyer, let alone a barrister.
"Man in the Net" started the trend of boh takchek handsome male.When I was a kid, I was inspired by the movie 法外情 法内情
Law of Evidence not easy, cannot 死背 one.Can co-accused evidence be admitted ?
In Singapore, a co-accused in a joint criminal trial may give evidence, and their confession or testimony can be used as evidence against other co-accused to support a conviction, even for serious charges like drug trafficking. The court has discretion to rely on such evidence, although it is treated with caution and generally requires corroboration.
Key aspects of a co-accused giving evidence in Singapore include:
Admissibility of Confession: Under the Evidence Act, the confession of a co-accused (when jointly tried) is admissible against others, and a conviction can be based solely on this evidence, according to this article from Transformative Justice Collective.
Cross-Examination: If a co-accused gives evidence, they can be cross-examined by the prosecution or by other co-accused, notes this section of the Evidence Act on Singapore Statutes Online.
Voluntary Evidence: A co-accused is generally expected to testify voluntarily to support their own defense, rather than being called by another co-accused, notes this legal document from Lanka Law.
Credibility Issues: Questions regarding the co-accused's testimony are allowed if they are relevant to their credibility as a witness, according to this section of the Evidence Act on Singapore Statutes Online.
I think SC Tan must prove to the court if Co-accused made financially gain from market manipulation

My mother was inspired by the character of Deanie IpWhen I was a kid, I was inspired by the movie 法外情 法内情

I thought Ms Ip stays in Jurong EastMy mother was inspired by the character of Deanie Ip![]()
Today got trial
Also Goh Jin Hian and his accomplices did not file notice to SGX about their own share purchaseThe relevant account is that of the other co-accused, Kelvyn Oo. The Company did not have a Chief Legal Officer, and Kelvyn, a lawyer, held the role of Chief Corporate Officer.
If u are rich or well-connected, u can drag and drag your case until u are finally acquited. 555fucking farce, 2018 till now is 8 years, might as well wait till 3018 then try the fucker
"Man in the Net" started the trend of boh takchek handsome male.
Ever since then it's all about 耍帅.
The blaming game has begun:Today got trial
PP tomorrow will deal with Goh Jin HianThe blaming game has begun:
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/sin...ng-himself-goh-jin-hian-defence-cross-5922851
SC Tan 出招了!