• 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.

WP saga continues! Raeesah says WP leadership told her to keep lying

JohnTan

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Wat about nepotism? Like pinky n the jinx n their son?

The good PM Lee was picked by former PM Goh to be his successor. Madam Ho Ching was picked by a panel of qualified people who did not report directly to the good PM Lee. Temasek also showed very good returns on our investments over the years with Madam Ho Ching as the helm. Compare her results to that of jiuhu's Najib, who plundered his own country's reserves in the 1MBD scandal.
 

Hypocrite-The

Alfrescian
Loyal
The good PM Lee was picked by former PM Goh to be his successor. Madam Ho Ching was picked by a panel of qualified people who did not report directly to the good PM Lee. Temasek also showed very good returns on our investments over the years with Madam Ho Ching as the helm. Compare her results to that of jiuhu's Najib, who plundered his own country's reserves in the 1MBD scandal.
There are ppl that don't report to the PM? U sure?
 

parrardee

Alfrescian
Loyal
My my, bitchy aren't we? Insulting those who see things differently from you. You have the hallmarks of a spoilt brat used to getting her own way all the time otherwise its foot stamping time.
o

Only a stupid singaporean believes what Singapore media say. You cant understand what caused SPH's demise?
 

winners

Alfrescian
Loyal
You are a PAP supporter as far as I can see. Something goes wrong with the WP and you discredit them totally. As a party grow larger there will be issues with errant members, Khan will not be the first nor the last.
Am I seeing double, otherwise, why one by one, the worms are now starting to wriggle out of the can?
@LordElrond, according to your logic, I should not discredit the WP, but can either you or Pritam is going to refute this?

As for @ckmpd, I'm sure you'll label this as another cheap propaganda by the CNA and SPH media. However, if Yaw Shin Leong did not say anything, how could CNA, and probably SPH by tomorrow, get this news?

Now I can understand why Chen Show Mao had long given up on the WP as I learned that he's from a different camp within the same faction. Otherwise, he has very good talent and potential in my opinion.

Yaw Shin Leong, expelled by WP in 2012 for not addressing alleged affair, now claims party asked him to ‘stay silent’

SINGAPORE — Former Workers’ Party (WP) Member of Parliament (MP) Yaw Shin Leong has refuted a statement made by the party’s chief Pritam Singh last week that he was dismissed from the opposition party in 2012 — over allegations of having an extramarital affair — because he did not hold himself accountable to both the party and the public.

Mr Yaw said in a Facebook post on Monday (Dec 6), written under the alias “Amos Rao”, that Mr Singh’s assertion was not true.

Mr Singh had brought up the 2012 incident last Thursday during a press conference regarding former WP MP Raeesah Khan’s resignation from the party on Nov 30, after she confessed that she had lied in Parliament during a speech she gave in August.

Writing on Facebook, Mr Yaw said that even before the allegations had surfaced, he had “accounted the situation candidly” to the party’s then-secretary general, Mr Low Thia Khiang.

And when the allegations surfaced, he “immediately accounted” to both Mr Low and party chairman Sylvia Lim.

“I was advised to stay silent,” said Mr Yaw.

Mr Yaw said he “placed party before self” and in order to “minimise the fallout”, he kept silent as well as resigned from the party’s central executive committee (CEC),

“My intention was to give WP CEC a blank cheque to paint the narrative required. To facilitate the process, I travelled out of Singapore voluntarily,” he said.


Nevertheless, Mr Yaw said he was expelled from the party on Feb 14, 2012 for “breaking the faith, trust and expectations of the party and people”.

“I am okay with this narrative, but I am not okay with what Pritam said, for I did account myself.”

In his comments last Thursday, Mr Singh admitted that party leaders knew that Ms Raeesah, a former Sengkang Group Representation Constituency MP, had lied a week after she delivered her parliamentary speech — nearly three months before she set the record straight in Parliament, and her subsequent resignation.

A reporter noted that Mr Yaw was dismissed within a month of the allegations of the affair surfacing, and asked Mr Singh why there was this “difference in time frame”.

In response, Mr Singh said that Ms Khan’s actions had occurred in Parliament, and once the record had been “set right”, the party needed to assess where it stood with regards to her conduct.

“There were a number of things that we wanted to do, and we did not feel that we had to rush that process. She is an MP after all, and it was important that natural justice took its course,” he said.

On Mr Yaw, he said that the man “did not account himself” to the party after the allegations against him were made.

“He did not address the media, he did not address the party,” said Mr Singh.

“The party was willing to give him some space to get himself organised, but this just went on, and it went on to a point where this was just unreasonable conduct."

Mr Singh said this was “not acceptable” and the party took the decision to fire Mr Yaw.

Mr Yaw was elected MP for the Hougang Single Member Constituency in the 2011 General Election.

In January 2012, allegations of his affair with a married woman emerged.

Mr Yaw told the media then that he would not be commenting on the rumours.

On Feb 15 that year, the party announced Mr Yaw’s expulsion, and this triggered a by-election which saw WP member Png Eng Huat taking over Mr Yaw’s position as the MP for Hougang.

Mr Yaw said in his Facebook post on Monday that he was “not entertaining any media queries and will leave (the matter) as it is”.

TODAY has sought comment from the WP.

Source: https://www.todayonline.com/singapo...ing-alleged-affair-now-claims-party-asked-him
 
Last edited:

pvtpublic

Alfrescian
Loyal
If it was personal, the WP town council saga would have been over by 2012 and all of them languishing in a jail cell by 2013 for their financial mismanagement of the town council. Instead, the court case has dragged on indefinitely till now. As far as oppie Bayi has been an elected MP, this court case has been hanging over his head like a shadow.
ooo... you make us sound like Malaysia!! Bosku will become PM again with 1mdb still hanging over him. power la. Singapore also Boleh!
 

Rogue Trader

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset

Raeesah Khan stands by her evidence; psychiatrist says she did not have any disorder that would 'predispose' her to lying: COP report​

Raeesah Khan stands by her evidence; psychiatrist says she did not have any disorder that would 'predispose' her to lying: COP report

Ms Raeesah Khan and psychiatrist Dr Christopher Cheok appearing before the Committee of Privileges on Dec 22, 2021. (Image: YouTube/govsg)

Chew Hui Min
22 Dec 2021 10:47PM (Updated: 22 Dec 2021 11:10PM)

SINGAPORE: Former Workers' Party (WP) Member of Parliament Raeesah Khan maintained that the party's leaders did not tell her to clarify a lie she had told in Parliament, according to a summary of further evidence she gave on Wednesday (Dec 22) to the Committee of Privileges (COP).

This is Ms Khan's second time appearing before the committee, which is looking into a complaint against her for lying in Parliament.

She admitted that she had lied in Parliament on Aug 3 about a sexual assault case, and had repeated the lie on Oct 4.

On Nov 1, Ms Khan admitted in Parliament that she had lied about accompanying a sexual assault victim to the police station because she was a survivor of a sexual assault. She also said she did not want to reveal that she had heard the anecdote in a support group.

She subsequently resigned as an MP and from the WP.

When questioned by the COP on Dec 2, Ms Khan said that she had told WP leaders at a meeting on Aug 8 about the lie and was then told to "retain the narrative", which she took to mean that she should continue lying.

She also sent a text message on Aug 8 to two aides - Ms Loh Pei Ying and Mr Yudhisthra Nathan, telling them that WP leaders had told her to "take the information to the grave". Ms Loh and Mr Nathan had given evidence corroborating Ms Khan's account.

ADVERTISEMENT​


But WP chief Pritam Singh told the COP that this conversation did not take place, and that there had been no discussion during the meeting about whether or how to correct Ms Khan’s untruth.

"EXTREMELY OUT OF LINE"​

In addition, he suggested to the COP that Ms Khan suffered from "disassociation" due to past trauma and asked that she undergo a psychiatric assessment.

In her testimony to the COP, WP chair Sylvia Lim also said that Ms Khan was "doing things without thinking about what she was doing".

She said that Ms Khan submitted documents to a WP disciplinary panel from a psychotherapist, with indications that Ms Khan was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and that she is undergoing therapy.

The Office of the Clerk of Parliament said in a press release on Wednesday that the Committee invited Ms Khan to undergo a psychiatric assessment.

She agreed and saw Dr Christopher Cheok, acting chief and senior consultant at the department of forensic psychiatry at the Institute of Mental Health, on Dec 17 and Dec 20.

Responding to the claims by Mr Singh and Ms Lim about her mental state, Ms Khan said that it was "extremely out of line" for them "to have used mental illness as a means to discredit someone", according to the summary.

"Mr Singh had tried to paint a picture of her as someone who was mentally unstable, when she was of sound mind," said the report from the COP summarising the key points of Ms Khan's testimony.

"TAKE IT TO THE GRAVE" SAID BY MR SINGH: KHAN​

On what happened at an Aug 8 meeting with Mr Singh, Ms Lim and Mr Faisal Manap, Ms Khan said that their evidence was untrue.

According to her, the words “take it to the grave” were used by Mr Singh, in front of Ms Lim and Mr Faisal. She said that this was not a phrase she would "ordinarily use", the COP report said.

ADVERTISEMENT​


She added that there was no discussion during the meeting on whether she should disclose the sexual assault to her father and family, which Mr Singh claimed he had told her to do.

Mr Singh and Ms Khan had also given differing accounts of an Oct 3 meeting at her house, a day before the Parliament sitting where she repeated her lie when questioned by Home Affairs and Law Minister K Shanmugam.

Ms Khan had earlier told the COP that during this visit, Mr Singh told her that if she kept to her existing narrative, there would be "no judgment".

But Mr Singh said he told Ms Khan that “if the issue came up”, Ms Khan had “to take responsibility and ownership of the issue”, and if she did so, he “will not judge” her.

Ms Khan said that Mr Singh had never said the words “take ownership and responsibility” to her, nor did he tell her to clarify the lie in Parliament.

LIED AGAIN AS MR SINGH DID NOT REPLY TO HER MESSAGE​

On the day of the Oct 4 Parliament sitting, Ms Khan sent Mr Singh a message, asking: “What should I do, Pritam?”.

When asked about this, Ms Khan said that she was waiting for Mr Singh to respond to her message, to give her guidance about what she should do. As Mr Singh did not reply to her, she lied again.

Later that night, sometime past 11pm, Ms Khan met Mr Singh and Ms Lim in the office of Leader of the Opposition.

Mr Singh previously said that Ms Khan was "in a daze" and had said: “Perhaps there is another way. That is, to tell the truth.”

Ms Khan agreed that she said those words, but disagreed that she had been "in a daze" when she said those words.

Ms Lim had said that Mr Singh responded by asking Ms Khan if she "hadn’t already chosen a path", the report said.

Ms Khan testified that she was "shocked" by Mr Singh’s response because there was "no intention or directive" from him to tell the truth at the time, said the COP report.

Ms Khan told the committee that Mr Singh had not presented her with a choice on Oct 3, but had told her that "if she continued the narrative, he will not judge her", the report said.

DOES NOT HAVE DISSOCIATION​

She told the committee that she did not say she had disassociation. She clarified that she mentioned to the WP disciplinary panel that she may have symptoms of PTSD.
When asked what symptoms they were, she said one of the symptoms was dissociation, but had never said that this was something that she was going through.
Dr Cheok explained that dissociation is a symptom, not a medical diagnosis. It refers to the loss of the integrative function of the mind, and may be experienced by normal people in different situations, said the report.
The psychiatrist gave evidence to the committee after assessing Ms Khan and interviewing her husband, and said that she "did not suffer from any significant psychiatric disorder that would have impaired her ability to speak truthfully" in Parliament or before the COP.
"Dr Cheok said that Ms Khan did not suffer from any psychiatric disorder that would predispose her to telling untruths," added the report.
"Having been in practice for more than 25 years, he said that persons with psychiatric disorders do not generally tell untruths more frequently than any other human being."
Dr Cheok also said that Ms Khan did not have PTSD and did not suffer from "any significant or material dissociation during the material period".
"While Dr Cheok did not deny that Ms Khan had some symptoms of being psychological traumatised, he was of the view that the symptoms did not reach the threshold of a psychiatric disorder," said the COP report.
"In his view, it was a normal reaction for someone who had gone through a traumatic experience, to continue to have some anxiety when speaking about the topic. This did not mean that the person would be mentally impaired or incapacitated."

"OF SOUND MIND"​

He testified that her judgment and decision-making capacity was not impaired and that she was of sound mind.
Dr Cheok was also asked if it was possible that Ms Khan’s judgment could have been affected by the trauma, in a way that caused her to have “false memory creation”.
He reiterated that Ms Khan did not suffer from dissociation and that in his assessment, when Ms Khan spoke of her assault, she was "not affected to an extent that caused her to lose her mental capacity".
He was then asked whether a person who is suffering from trauma, while still generally high functioning, could be "capable of sending out a message that selectively contained a lie".
"Dr Cheok said that generally it is possible but there also may be other explanations why a person may give a falsehood. However, in the specific context of Ms Khan, Dr Cheok disagreed with this possibility," said the COP report.

Source: CNA/hm(mi)
 

JohnTan

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset

Raeesah Khan stands by her evidence; psychiatrist says she did not have any disorder that would 'predispose' her to lying: COP report​

Raeesah Khan stands by her evidence; psychiatrist says she did not have any disorder that would 'predispose' her to lying: COP report'predispose' her to lying: COP report

Ms Raeesah Khan and psychiatrist Dr Christopher Cheok appearing before the Committee of Privileges on Dec 22, 2021. (Image: YouTube/govsg)

Chew Hui Min
22 Dec 2021 10:47PM (Updated: 22 Dec 2021 11:10PM)

SINGAPORE: Former Workers' Party (WP) Member of Parliament Raeesah Khan maintained that the party's leaders did not tell her to clarify a lie she had told in Parliament, according to a summary of further evidence she gave on Wednesday (Dec 22) to the Committee of Privileges (COP).

This is Ms Khan's second time appearing before the committee, which is looking into a complaint against her for lying in Parliament.

She admitted that she had lied in Parliament on Aug 3 about a sexual assault case, and had repeated the lie on Oct 4.

On Nov 1, Ms Khan admitted in Parliament that she had lied about accompanying a sexual assault victim to the police station because she was a survivor of a sexual assault. She also said she did not want to reveal that she had heard the anecdote in a support group.

She subsequently resigned as an MP and from the WP.

When questioned by the COP on Dec 2, Ms Khan said that she had told WP leaders at a meeting on Aug 8 about the lie and was then told to "retain the narrative", which she took to mean that she should continue lying.

She also sent a text message on Aug 8 to two aides - Ms Loh Pei Ying and Mr Yudhisthra Nathan, telling them that WP leaders had told her to "take the information to the grave". Ms Loh and Mr Nathan had given evidence corroborating Ms Khan's account.

ADVERTISEMENT​


But WP chief Pritam Singh told the COP that this conversation did not take place, and that there had been no discussion during the meeting about whether or how to correct Ms Khan’s untruth.

"EXTREMELY OUT OF LINE"​

In addition, he suggested to the COP that Ms Khan suffered from "disassociation" due to past trauma and asked that she undergo a psychiatric assessment.

In her testimony to the COP, WP chair Sylvia Lim also said that Ms Khan was "doing things without thinking about what she was doing".

She said that Ms Khan submitted documents to a WP disciplinary panel from a psychotherapist, with indications that Ms Khan was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and that she is undergoing therapy.

The Office of the Clerk of Parliament said in a press release on Wednesday that the Committee invited Ms Khan to undergo a psychiatric assessment.

She agreed and saw Dr Christopher Cheok, acting chief and senior consultant at the department of forensic psychiatry at the Institute of Mental Health, on Dec 17 and Dec 20.

Responding to the claims by Mr Singh and Ms Lim about her mental state, Ms Khan said that it was "extremely out of line" for them "to have used mental illness as a means to discredit someone", according to the summary.

"Mr Singh had tried to paint a picture of her as someone who was mentally unstable, when she was of sound mind," said the report from the COP summarising the key points of Ms Khan's testimony.

"TAKE IT TO THE GRAVE" SAID BY MR SINGH: KHAN​

On what happened at an Aug 8 meeting with Mr Singh, Ms Lim and Mr Faisal Manap, Ms Khan said that their evidence was untrue.

According to her, the words “take it to the grave” were used by Mr Singh, in front of Ms Lim and Mr Faisal. She said that this was not a phrase she would "ordinarily use", the COP report said.

ADVERTISEMENT​


She added that there was no discussion during the meeting on whether she should disclose the sexual assault to her father and family, which Mr Singh claimed he had told her to do.

Mr Singh and Ms Khan had also given differing accounts of an Oct 3 meeting at her house, a day before the Parliament sitting where she repeated her lie when questioned by Home Affairs and Law Minister K Shanmugam.

Ms Khan had earlier told the COP that during this visit, Mr Singh told her that if she kept to her existing narrative, there would be "no judgment".

But Mr Singh said he told Ms Khan that “if the issue came up”, Ms Khan had “to take responsibility and ownership of the issue”, and if she did so, he “will not judge” her.

Ms Khan said that Mr Singh had never said the words “take ownership and responsibility” to her, nor did he tell her to clarify the lie in Parliament.

LIED AGAIN AS MR SINGH DID NOT REPLY TO HER MESSAGE​

On the day of the Oct 4 Parliament sitting, Ms Khan sent Mr Singh a message, asking: “What should I do, Pritam?”.

When asked about this, Ms Khan said that she was waiting for Mr Singh to respond to her message, to give her guidance about what she should do. As Mr Singh did not reply to her, she lied again.

Later that night, sometime past 11pm, Ms Khan met Mr Singh and Ms Lim in the office of Leader of the Opposition.

Mr Singh previously said that Ms Khan was "in a daze" and had said: “Perhaps there is another way. That is, to tell the truth.”

Ms Khan agreed that she said those words, but disagreed that she had been "in a daze" when she said those words.

Ms Lim had said that Mr Singh responded by asking Ms Khan if she "hadn’t already chosen a path", the report said.

Ms Khan testified that she was "shocked" by Mr Singh’s response because there was "no intention or directive" from him to tell the truth at the time, said the COP report.

Ms Khan told the committee that Mr Singh had not presented her with a choice on Oct 3, but had told her that "if she continued the narrative, he will not judge her", the report said.

DOES NOT HAVE DISSOCIATION​

She told the committee that she did not say she had disassociation. She clarified that she mentioned to the WP disciplinary panel that she may have symptoms of PTSD.
When asked what symptoms they were, she said one of the symptoms was dissociation, but had never said that this was something that she was going through.
Dr Cheok explained that dissociation is a symptom, not a medical diagnosis. It refers to the loss of the integrative function of the mind, and may be experienced by normal people in different situations, said the report.
The psychiatrist gave evidence to the committee after assessing Ms Khan and interviewing her husband, and said that she "did not suffer from any significant psychiatric disorder that would have impaired her ability to speak truthfully" in Parliament or before the COP.
"Dr Cheok said that Ms Khan did not suffer from any psychiatric disorder that would predispose her to telling untruths," added the report.
"Having been in practice for more than 25 years, he said that persons with psychiatric disorders do not generally tell untruths more frequently than any other human being."
Dr Cheok also said that Ms Khan did not have PTSD and did not suffer from "any significant or material dissociation during the material period".
"While Dr Cheok did not deny that Ms Khan had some symptoms of being psychological traumatised, he was of the view that the symptoms did not reach the threshold of a psychiatric disorder," said the COP report.
"In his view, it was a normal reaction for someone who had gone through a traumatic experience, to continue to have some anxiety when speaking about the topic. This did not mean that the person would be mentally impaired or incapacitated."

"OF SOUND MIND"​

He testified that her judgment and decision-making capacity was not impaired and that she was of sound mind.
Dr Cheok was also asked if it was possible that Ms Khan’s judgment could have been affected by the trauma, in a way that caused her to have “false memory creation”.
He reiterated that Ms Khan did not suffer from dissociation and that in his assessment, when Ms Khan spoke of her assault, she was "not affected to an extent that caused her to lose her mental capacity".
He was then asked whether a person who is suffering from trauma, while still generally high functioning, could be "capable of sending out a message that selectively contained a lie".
"Dr Cheok said that generally it is possible but there also may be other explanations why a person may give a falsehood. However, in the specific context of Ms Khan, Dr Cheok disagreed with this possibility," said the COP report.

Source: CNA/hm(mi)

Oppie bayi and the other wankers are so fucked!
 

Charlie99

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
What is there for R Khan, Ms Loh, Mr. Nathan, to gain, from what they testified.
Could they not make it easier, testify according to the truth.
 

rodent2005

Alfrescian
Loyal
The good PM Lee was picked by former PM Goh to be his successor. Madam Ho Ching was picked by a panel of qualified people who did not report directly to the good PM Lee. Temasek also showed very good returns on our investments over the years with Madam Ho Ching as the helm. Compare her results to that of jiuhu's Najib, who plundered his own country's reserves in the 1MBD scandal.
No point saying good returns, let's see some tangible benefits for Singaporeans like increasing interest on CPF OA to 4% and interest on CPF SA, MA and RA to 6%, just to cover inflation.
 

Rogue Trader

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
What is there for R Khan, Ms Loh, Mr. Nathan, to gain, from what they testified.
Could they not make it easier, testify according to the truth.

It's been established WP was infiltrated with "secret squirrels" when internal info was leaked during the Yaw-gate hearing. I'm sure there re still many squirrels within the organisation ready to plunge a long knife into backs
 

Patriotmissile

Alfrescian
Loyal
Is this RK bo nao ? Ask her to take to the grave means telling her to keep quiet about it, whether it is true or not. The WP were not interested to know. However, since PAP wanted to pursue it, then WP would have to respond by setting up a disciplinary Council to self censor. It is only right to annex her since she confessed. She resigned. Case closed. What is the big deal?
What about Vivian? Talking shit and behaving like a patron in a cinema. Why not censure him?
 
Last edited:

Scrooball (clone)

Alfrescian
Loyal

"TAKE IT TO THE GRAVE" SAID BY MR SINGH: KHAN​

On what happened at an Aug 8 meeting with Mr Singh, Ms Lim and Mr Faisal Manap, Ms Khan said that their evidence was untrue.

According to her, the words “take it to the grave” were used by Mr Singh, in front of Ms Lim and Mr Faisal. She said that this was not a phrase she would "ordinarily use", the COP report said.
Nobody uses that term these days, certainly not some young stupid activist like Ms Cunt. U don't need a crystal ball to see who's telling the truth.
 

myfoot123

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Oppie bayi and the other wankers are so fucked!
The psychiatrist needs to get himself examined by another non-partisan psychiatrist. If RK tossed a fire on the MP, the psychiatrist's verdict will be very different and had her send to IMH forever. I don't trust "expert" in Singapore.
 
Top