Roy Ngerng and Davinder Singh
Roy Ngerng in his interview with Joel Lazarus (image - YouTube)
Roy Ngerng in his interview with Joel Lazarus (image – YouTube)

• High Court Judge Justice Lee Seiu Kin started the second day of the hearing for damages to be awarded to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong by telling the accused, blogger Roy Ngerng, about what he can do in the witness box where he was to be cross-examined by PM Lee’s lawyer, Davinder Singh. Justice Lee allowed Ngerng to object to questions by Singh, as he has no legal counsel. Nevertheless, Ngerng did not exercise that option throughout the cross-examination.

• Ngerng also provided additional evidence – two bundles of documents of 35 and 47 pages – to show that PM Lee’s reputation has not been affected by the his blog post. He noted that respondents on PM Lee’s Facebook page on two recent occasions – when he celebrated his 10 years a Prime Minister and when he posted about corruption in government – praised him for his honour and dignity. Ngerng thus contended that PM Lee’s reputation was not affected, and hence there was no need for him to seek aggravated damages.

• Davinder Singh, PM Lee’s lawyer, started the cross examination by referring Ngerng to his past occupation and experience in promoting healthcare, affirming that he would be someone who would “carefully consider what [he] say and how [he] said it” and that he would “make whatever point to get the message home”. This was to follow later into Singh’s suggestion that Ngerng had been deliberate in crafting his blog posts and using the Letter of Demand to further defame PM Lee.

• Singh mentioned The Online Citizen twice during the cross examination – the first when asking Ngerng if he was aware that TOC carried reports of his defamation case; and the second when asking Ngerng if he was aware that Mr Leong Sze Hian, one of the people whom Ngerng had granted access to a video he produced that was deemed defamatory, contributed content to TOC. It was not clear where Singh was heading with these questions.

• Singh asked Ngerng if he was aware of that criminal charges were laid on the people involved in the City Harvest Church case, and if he knew that there was a lot of public interest in the case, when he had drawn references between City Harvest Church and the Central Provident Fund. “I’m aware that people are interested in Serina Wee and maybe Sun Ho. I’m not sure if they are interested in the case,” Ngerng replied.

• Singh repeatedly attempted to draw links in Ngerng’s blog post that suggested parallels between City Harvest Church and CPF management. Ngerng insisted that the charts he used did not mention misappropriation of CPF monies in relation to LHL, but only in reference to the government. This went on for a while with Singh trying to pick apart the statements Ngerng made in court, until Ngerng eventually retorted in frustration, “Which part of my statement said ‘Lee Hsien Loong’?”

Roy Ngerng protest TOCTV• “Aiyoh, what kind of logic is that!” – Ngerng had openly exclaimed when Singh repeatedly cited paragraphs in his Evidence in Chief to try and draw links between how Ngerng referred to the CPF and PM Lee.

• Ngerng continued to challenge Singh to show proof of the link, to which Singh has yet to do so directly. “Mr Singh, You are a Senior Counsel, do not drag the argument!” he said at one point.

• At another point during the heated exchange, Justice Lee reminded Ngerng that he can choose to answer or not answer Singh’s questions, but he should avoid “berating the Senior Counsel”.

• Singh sought to convince the court that in publishing Letter of Demand, RN was deliberately trying to increase traffic to and publicity for his site. Ngerng, however, insisted that he was scared, sad and angry that the government had wanted to sue him for raising the CPF issue. “My initial reaction was – oh my god, Davinder Singh, the PM’s lawyer, sent me a letter!”

• Singh tried to suggest that, because Ngerng still had the Letter of Demand on his blog, he was continuing the aggravation. “Did you ask me to take down the Letter of Demand?” Ngerng retorted, saying that he would have removed it if Singh had asked him to. “Come on, Mr Singh… I have been very supportive of you the past few days, you know that.”

• Singh asked Ngerng why he continued to write about the CPF. “Are you suggesting that the purpose of the Letter [of Demand] was to cow me into submission?” Ngerng responded. “I will still stand up (and fight), because [CPF and the defamation suit] were separate issues.”

• At another point, when Singh cross examined him about a video he posted that suggested Ngerng was referring to CPF management and PM Lee as one and the same, Ngerng told Singh to look at the video in its entirely instead, retorting, “You do not get to cherry-pick what you want to read in my video, what you want to link it to.”

• DS pointed out that following Ngerng’s promise that he would not repeat the allegations, he sent an email to “a host of journalists”, publishing the link to the Letter of Demand. “You drew attention to the letter, knowing that the letter had [a link to] the offending article in there.” Ngerng, however, said that he also included a link to his apology in the email.

Also read TOC’s report on the second day of the hearing.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Ever bigger financial deals: how does it benefit S’poreans?

Leong Sze Hian According to The Australian, “The stock exchanges of Australia…

照常开课引批评 王乙康发长文以三大原因解释

上周,教育部宣布将在今日(23日)照常开课,但随着疫情日益严重,我国新增许多境外移入的确诊病例,让不少家长表示担忧,甚至发出网络请愿书,要求教育部继续延长关闭学校的日期。 此外,教育部长王乙康也透露,有些家长也写信给教育部质询为何要在23日开课。 对此,王乙康也在脸书上发长文解释,开课背后的三大考虑。他表示,如今也有研究证明,武汉冠状病毒(COVID-19)对于年轻人的影响不如成年人,如同水痘对年轻人的影响。 引述国大、世卫组织专家说法 多数年轻患者都是因为家里或学校以外的缘故被感染,他也引述新加坡国立大学医学部主任、世卫组织全球疫情和警报响应网络主席费舍尔(Dale Fisher)的说法,学生如今能够上学可能会更安全,因为他们会与同侪一起相处而不是与到其他社区闲晃,增加感染机率。 其次,延长关闭时间也会打乱许多家庭的日常生活,尤其是前线工作人员,以及无法找到协助或保姆的父母。 “学校采取更多预防措施” 王乙康也向家长保证,学校会采取更多预防措施,保证学生的安全,若出现任何不适症状,如喉咙痛或咳嗽,学生也将立即被送回家进行隔离。 针对3月初到海外旅游的学生或教职人员,也已发出缺席假通知。同时学校也会在学校门口再三确定学生的旅行史。 另一方,课外活动与校外活动也将暂停,学生待在教室内,教室内的桌椅也将分开进行安全隔离,并随时留意他们的卫生。 对于王乙康的解释,许多网民纷纷斥责学业难道比命还重要吗?也有网民认为学校内除了学生,还有其他教职人员,甚至有些学生会搭乘公共交通,所以难以避免,应该先实施停课。…

SGX-listed companies to embrace e-communication for annual reports and other documents to shareholders

The Singapore Exchange (SGX) has announced that listed companies will soon be…

Dreams crushed for Taiwanese part-timer in Singapore

By Terry Xu Singapore is being featured on Taiwan news, but perhaps…