t123
14-02-2013, 04:08 PM
Former Central Narcotics Bureau director Ng Boon Gay was acquitted Thursday of all four charges against him in the sex-for-contracts case that had gripped Singapore over the course of the trial that began last year.
District Judge Siva Shanmugam impeached the testimony of prosecution witness and former IT sales executive Cecilia Sue.
Speaking to reporters after the verdict, defence counsel Tan Chee Meng said it was "vindication of Ng Boon Gay, the fact that he's not corrupt and his innocence has been proven".
Family members around Ng were a picture of relief and gladness.
A spokesperson from the Attorney General's Chambers said, "We are studying the grounds of the decision and will decide whether or not to appeal."
Last month, the judge heard closing arguments from both sides after 14 days of trial, where Ng is facing four charges of having corruptly obtained sexual gratification from former IT sales executive Cecilia Sue, allegedly in exchange for advancing her then-employers’ business interests.
Defence counsel Tan Chee Meng had said it was “dangerous” to convict Ng based on evidence provided by Sue as the 36-year-old lied in court on numerous occasions, not simply to protect her marriage, but also to implicate his client.
“This (Sue) is a witness who is prepared to say anything to implicate the accused,” he had said. “You see a lady in court who was not only there to protect herself but also to ensure that (Ng) is convicted.”
Tan had also argued that even with its best case, the prosecution had not proven its case beyond all reasonable doubt — which is why Ng should be acquitted of his charges.
He said Ng had stayed at “arm’s length” from the bureau’s IT procurement processes, and could not have thrown any spanners into the works, as far as Sue’s business deals with the CNB were concerned. Tan added that Ng also never promised Sue any favours, neither did Sue ask him for or expect any, and urged the court not to “convict an innocent man just to bring home the message that corruption is wrong”.
Conversely, the prosecution had argued simply that when a civil servant seeks gratification from others, the law provides that it is presumed that his gratification was sought corruptly, through Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Deputy public prosecutor Tan Ken Hwee said this meant that the burden lay on Ng to prove he had received gratification from Sue legitimately.
Tan pointed out that it was not disputed that Ng did not make “any genuine efforts to assure (Sue) that he would not have any role to play” in the business transactions she was interested in with the CNB, and also the fact that he failed to declare any conflicts of interest to the bureau when he signed off the approval for the procurement contracts in question.
He stressed also that the case is not about policing morality or marital vows, and that it would be sufficient to prove Ng’s corrupt intent as long as Ng had reason to believe that Sue performed the acts of fellatio on him so he would show her employers favour in business transactions.
Now kenna blow job is not illegal liao.
District Judge Siva Shanmugam impeached the testimony of prosecution witness and former IT sales executive Cecilia Sue.
Speaking to reporters after the verdict, defence counsel Tan Chee Meng said it was "vindication of Ng Boon Gay, the fact that he's not corrupt and his innocence has been proven".
Family members around Ng were a picture of relief and gladness.
A spokesperson from the Attorney General's Chambers said, "We are studying the grounds of the decision and will decide whether or not to appeal."
Last month, the judge heard closing arguments from both sides after 14 days of trial, where Ng is facing four charges of having corruptly obtained sexual gratification from former IT sales executive Cecilia Sue, allegedly in exchange for advancing her then-employers’ business interests.
Defence counsel Tan Chee Meng had said it was “dangerous” to convict Ng based on evidence provided by Sue as the 36-year-old lied in court on numerous occasions, not simply to protect her marriage, but also to implicate his client.
“This (Sue) is a witness who is prepared to say anything to implicate the accused,” he had said. “You see a lady in court who was not only there to protect herself but also to ensure that (Ng) is convicted.”
Tan had also argued that even with its best case, the prosecution had not proven its case beyond all reasonable doubt — which is why Ng should be acquitted of his charges.
He said Ng had stayed at “arm’s length” from the bureau’s IT procurement processes, and could not have thrown any spanners into the works, as far as Sue’s business deals with the CNB were concerned. Tan added that Ng also never promised Sue any favours, neither did Sue ask him for or expect any, and urged the court not to “convict an innocent man just to bring home the message that corruption is wrong”.
Conversely, the prosecution had argued simply that when a civil servant seeks gratification from others, the law provides that it is presumed that his gratification was sought corruptly, through Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Deputy public prosecutor Tan Ken Hwee said this meant that the burden lay on Ng to prove he had received gratification from Sue legitimately.
Tan pointed out that it was not disputed that Ng did not make “any genuine efforts to assure (Sue) that he would not have any role to play” in the business transactions she was interested in with the CNB, and also the fact that he failed to declare any conflicts of interest to the bureau when he signed off the approval for the procurement contracts in question.
He stressed also that the case is not about policing morality or marital vows, and that it would be sufficient to prove Ng’s corrupt intent as long as Ng had reason to believe that Sue performed the acts of fellatio on him so he would show her employers favour in business transactions.
Now kenna blow job is not illegal liao.