Signup
LoginStupid mistress
18 posts
-
-
I never wanted to be mistress
YES, I believed my son should have got $300,000. His father had told me so.
20 July 2008
YES, I believed my son should have got $300,000. His father had told me so.
This is what Teo Sew Eng told The New Paper after her sentencing on Wednesday.
'When Anthony was dying from cancer, he told me he had set aside $300,000 so I could raise Louis till he turned 21,' she said.
She said she was shocked when Mrs Dorothy Chen told her that only $100,000 was left for Louis.
Teo denied consulting a medium to ascertain the value of the inheritance.
She said: 'I told Dorothy that $100,000 wasn't enough to raise Louis and I asked if Anthony had left any more money for Louis. She said there was none, so I thought she had cheated Louis.'
Teo also refuted most of Mr Chen's allegations about her affair with Mr Hong.
She claimed Mr Chen's marriage was on the rocks when she met him in 1988. Subsequently, they began cohabiting and even went on trips to Australia together.
Teo insisted she had ended the affair after Mr Hong did not keep his promise to marry her.
She said: 'I wanted proper status, especially when I became pregnant. I can accept people calling me an unwed mother but I can't accept being labelled as the other woman.
'I guess love is blind. I believed Anthony when he told me to be patient and wait for him to divorce his wife.'
She said Mr Hong accompanied her for pre-natal check-ups and was with her when she gave birth in Thomson Medical Centre in October 1990.
Mr Hong also chose the boy's name.
By the time the boy was two months old, there was still no sign that marriage was on the cards.
When she questioned Mr Hong, he supposedly gave excuses that his wife was seriously ill. Suspicious, Teo decided to visit his family.
She recalled: 'I saw the family coming home in Anthony's car after having dinner outside. They looked so happy together. I felt deceived so I decided to leave Anthony.'
But Teo claimed she was cordial to Mr Hong when he visited her to give her maintenance money for Louis.
She said: 'I'm a Catholic and I've never burnt any incense or joss sticks. Whatever happened, Anthony was still my son's father so I never stopped him from visiting us.
'In any case, how much can $1,500 buy? It wasn't enough as I had to hire a maid and pay for my son's expenses.
'The money he gave me can never make up for the pain and suffering I went through.'
As father and son had acknowledged each other, Teo was disappointed when Louis' name was omitted from Mr Hong's obituary.
She said: 'I remember seeing the obituary and telling Louis his dad had died. My son was so forlorn as he scrutinised the obituary and realised his name was excluded.'
Now she hopes that Louis will complete his diploma course at the Singapore Institute of Management.
She said: 'What has happened has already happened. I have already pleaded guilty and I just hope to move on from here.'When one choose to be a mistress and bear his child, please makes sure he is truly wealthy. If he can only afford to give $100K as inheritance and $1,500 monthly maintenance when he was alive, he's no rich man. He was only a middle income earner with cravings for extra-marital sex.
When the dam burst, the only one who truly suffer is the boy.
-
-
-
i didn’t want to post here seriously. but i wana clear doubts of other poeple.
Firstly, don’t be so quick to assume that the Mr Hong ain’t very rich, if you do read in another article, he is a director of a very big company in singapore(Continental Steel Private limited) and own shares in the company.
If you do read the news,
they(this company) are involved in the changi airport t2&3 projects, the circle line, SMU and many more, the company earns more than 100million per year(net profit).
His assets worth more than 10m SGD at the point he died, he had the most expensive jaguar at that time with a driver, owns a few condominiums, had more than few mill as liquid assets and his shares in the company is worth at least 5mill today, with around, 400k given as dividends per year.to ms fi:
Teo is rich at that point in time also,
she didn’t have to be someone’s mistress to lead her beautiful and extravgant life.
she was very afraid of Hong in actual fact.to mr pervert bert:
and bloody bert bert…. u block me on msn isit… so long boh see u, ccb !to mr chibet:
if you think that Teo wanted to be with him willingly, you are wrong.to mr redizalert:
The mistress was Teo, the guy who was with Teo was Hong.
Chen is Hong’s sister’s husband, aka brother in law.to ms the bear:
please take note that the new paper reports trash news and many things reported are one sided, do note that this is what Mr chen claimed rather than what really happened.to ms ferret:
to bittertears:
don’t bother to readi will entertain all questions in private messaging if anyone has any doubts in this case.
i know all the people involved.
-
-
-
Originally posted by mistyblue:
she choose her life and made her son suffer for her choices. she should not complain about the lack of money. No one forced her to be the other woman and she could have given the child up for adoption.
In another way, she bore the consequences and expected Chen to pay for the kid as she would have difficulties making ends meet without his support.She could have chosen abortion or letting up for adoption - which means that she could let a chance for the child to live or see her child again.
I believe she made the right choice out of the wrong decision. Afterall it would seem more humane.
-
