Did Law Minister make a veiled threat in Parliament to the person who helped draft Parti Liyani’s complaint?

I was watching CNA News last night when Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam made a strange remark which appear to me to be a veiled threat.

The Minister was asked by Leader of the Opposition (LO) Pritam Singh about Ms Parti Liyani’s complaint of 3 July – which was republished by HOME yesterday (4 Nov).

One of the areas of complaint was this:

In Court, there was possible tampering with evidence in an attempt to cast me as being untruthful to the Court. During my cross-examination, when the Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) asked the police officer to hand me the Gerald Genta watch, my lawyer observed that the police officer started shaking the watch while it was in his hand.

“I was then asked if the watch was working. At that point, and as the watch was passed around the Courtroom, its hands were moving. But during re-examination when my lawyer specifically asked the police officer not to shake the watch, the watch hands did not move at all.

Instead of answering Mr Singh (which I believe must be about the outcome of the complaint), the Minister said he didn’t understand why the complaint was made, and said something to the effect that it was not made by Ms Liyani.

What does the Minister mean when he said it was not made by Ms Liyani? If his statement meant that someone had assisted her in drafting the complaint, is that illegal or improper? If his intent is to hint that he knows who helped Ms Liyani draft the complaint, then I think it is most improper to use Parliament in this manner.

I sat up when I heard his remark. It appeared to me that he was making a veiled threat to the person who helped draft the complaint.

The Minister should get on with his job. It is a privilege to speak in Parliament, and he should not use this privilege to accuse or rebuke people who have no opportunity to respond to his allegations.

I was not in Parliament to watch the debates, and I may be wrong to arrive at this conclusion. But I hope the AGC/Police investigation report did address Ms Liyani’s complaint of 3 July 2020.

Tampering with evidence by shaking the watch to make it move is very serious, and I hope this is not true.


Teo Soh Lung




12 Responses to “Did Law Minister make a veiled threat in Parliament to the person who helped draft Parti Liyani’s complaint?”

  • Gps:

    Parliament,pass law.not bring out dirty out”laundries.”to show. Make police report and open investigation.

    GD Star Rating
    a WordPress rating system
  • Holy shit. Not once, but twice:

    This case is beyond belief.

    GD Star Rating
    a WordPress rating system
  • Same Method ?:

    This is more or less the same method when Pinky talked about his siblings in Parliament. They cannot reply to him because they were not present in Parliament.

    GD Star Rating
    a WordPress rating system
  • Aiyoyo!:

    Perhaps, it’s Too much Heaven
    Wonder how
    Wonder why

    GD Star Rating
    a WordPress rating system
  • Tremendous:

    Smart village indeed. Must make watch move by shaking, and don’t need to explain because it is NORMAL.

    GD Star Rating
    a WordPress rating system
  • engalish no so good:

    //If his statement meant that someone had assisted her in drafting the complaint, is that illegal or improper?//

    aiyoh. parti engalish no so good lar ? statement could have been drafted by another person with the gist of the meaning and content there lar ?? this is quite common ‘everywhere’ lar for botakchek (needing help) but engalish not so good having to ‘give’ statement / ‘file complaints’ in engalish lar ?? likewise corkt papers have to be phrased with the help of laryers and solidcitors with many commas and legal jargons lar ??? the reason why many entities also need PR firms to spin their stories lar ??

    how can a bo-tak-too-many-chek man (or lady) with engalish not so good alone go against a team of ‘super’ flyers (with powderful engalish) of polist, prosicuters but everything need to be conducted in engalish leh ???

    GD Star Rating
    a WordPress rating system
  • Not veiled but pstlbishly:

    Yes but it is not veiled to critical thinking Singaporeans, only to the 61% Singaporeans having US Republican mentality though Singaporeans generally considered to be smartinternationally but better known by LKY to be daft to the bones n he has no hesistation to impressed his FG r recruits. N if he do he would have to go if LKY is around. The case will be fast to lose if lky is aroound. The guy with his sbs fam will be second gone n the $25 millions will be surrendered with interests. This is why lky is followed for near 5 decades. He swollowed these arrogant shs whole the moment he felt damagedby their arrogance. Only lky can be arrogant, no other. Many who served him knew that n shivered when foreigners started to write their rosy picture n appear in their cover for the morrow you find them exile with enough to last them for 2 lives but not in active politic arena.

    the L n S n H should run to their church, temper or whatever to preyed their thanks for lky gone else now they will be kaputted. What do all seniors think? Agree or no?

    GD Star Rating
    a WordPress rating system
  • oxygen:

    DID ANYONE BRIEFED or told the DPP in question to shake the Gerald Genta watch PRIOR to that being tendered in evidence in the courtroom?

    It is ‘INEXPLICABLE’ or at least UNUSUAL that a high-quality branded watch needs to be “shaken” to wake up to its full proper functionality.

    Did the presiding judge in the district court sat up and noticed that or asked why the DPP shook the watch when it was presented in evidence of cross-examination of the accused?

    This is MIND-BOGGLING to me.

    GD Star Rating
    a WordPress rating system
  • liew mun leong must be jailed:

    the rot starts from the top.

    bajib was PM of msia and boy how he stole and stole. and najib copied the pap clown model by having cpib spf bank negara agc reporting to him directly so much so any hand in the 61% sheep cookie jar cannot be caught since cpib agc spf are needed to catch any such hand in the 61% cookie jar.

    in the new Netflix kDrama good detective, it is mentioned in order to correct any such wrongdoing, 4 groups need to cooperate, being spf cpib agc and sph.

    sure. in pap island, sph is not reporting to pap clown. yet the fat slob pap paper general is actually a pap clan member who sank NOL a 61% sheep asset and is now sinking sph another 61% sheep asset.

    do we care?

    no. after all, it is 61% sheep problem. we are just eat full nothing better to do 39% waiting to see pap clown and wife get caught by New Government like najib and wife did under Dr Mahatir Government.

    GD Star Rating
    a WordPress rating system
  • Liyani vs Goliath:

    Has Liyani single handedly exposed the possible ills in the system?
    An indonesian maid vs the system.

    GD Star Rating
    a WordPress rating system
  • xoxo:

    Even their FAVE PET DOGGIE$ GET MORE PROTECTION for their wrongdoings?
    Bow-wow,i am a *white* puppy.
    I ,like my master,can do no wrong?

    GD Star Rating
    a WordPress rating system
  • Harder Truths:

    Now we see the unstable showman of Team Despot running around frothing at the mouth, threatening and biting everyone within his reach to give them rabies. Good boy! Here is your reward: $$$$$$$$$$

    Next stage they will move the goalposts so no more own goal.

    GD Star Rating
    a WordPress rating system

Leave a Reply

 characters available

Scroll Down For More Interesting Stuff

Member Services
Self-SupportMembers LoginSelf-Support
Sponsored Advertisement
Search On TR Emeritus
Sponsored Advertisement
Visitors Statistic
Latest Statistic