TT Durain May Walk Out Free From C o c K
-
See this is another Wayang!!!
Which I predicted TT Durian would not be charged at end of the day!
If he is charged...somebody's wifffff would have no face!!!
-
i seriously don't know what is your problem and i read the news in online bulletin, the defence attorney has themselves to blame, for not checking the credibility of that witness, and now the court may throw out the case
and between this is so old news~~~~~ -
stop being childish~Originally posted by Lowclassman:See this is another Wayang!!!
Which I predicted TT Durian would not be charged at end of the day!
If he is charged...somebody's wifffff would have no face!!! -
They just screwed the case up themselves...
Actually they could deal with him like what the new NKF mgmt has did -
can change his statment just like that one meh??
-
Durai may walk free
ADVERTISEMENT
SINGAPORE: There has been a major development in the trial against former National Kidney Foundation's chief T.T. Durai.
Thursday is Day 16 of the criminal trial and it appears that Durai may walk free, at least on this particular charge, if the ongoing case is thrown out next week.
From proceedings, this may happen following the many discrepancies in statements by the prosecution's star witness, David Tan.
But two more witnesses have yet to take the stand.
Mr Tan was not in court on Thursday.
But the focus of the trial was still on his contradictory statements about the S$20,000 he had received from Durai.
And during the last ten minutes of the session, District Judge Aedit Abdullah said: "The Board of NKF did seem to have given Durai lots of leeway and this may impact the charge."
Durai's charge is based on the intent to deceive the old NKF.
But if NKF, as the judge noted, had given Durai the leeway, then Durai can be regarded as the NKF itself.
And this means, it is not possible for Durai to have the intent to deceive himself.
So the charge cannot be substantiated.
The judge also said: "One possibility is that we will accept one version or I can conclude at the end of the day, he (David Tan) cannot be believed at all."
If Mr Tan's entire testimony cannot be used, it could mean that the case may be thrown out.
The trial continues on Friday.
stupid new paper, they have to eat their words, already, if Mr Durai was to win the case. -
Elites 1, Non elites 0.
-
What have I got to do with you?Originally posted by hiphop2009:stop being childish~
You don't like it...you could just shut up!!! -
CPIB has prosecuted many cases of corruptions like false transport or stationery claims including some politically motivated cases.
Many were jailed or fined or lost their jobs due to such prosecutions.
Here is a case where Durai was personally involved in granting favours to many of this connections and even to board of directors.
However when it comes to elites with good connections to the higher up who were protected with remarks like "Durai was paid only peanuts", will the government and judges show greater leeways. -
All crows are black in color......Originally posted by robertteh:CPIB has prosecuted many cases of corruptions like false transport or stationery claims.
Many were jailed or fined or lost their jobs due to such prosecutions.
Here is a case where Durai was personally involved in granting favours to many of this connections and even to board of directors.
However when it comes to elites with good connections to the higher up who were protected with remarks like "Durai was paid only peanuts", will the government and judges show greater leeways. -
The prosecution for the most part seemed ill-prepared for this case. Worst, their star witness 'topsied and turned' throughout court; his testimony will surely be whitewashed by the presiding JC.
Unless the prosecution has stronger evidence of corruption and embezzlement, the case againts Durai is lost already. -
How about other criminal charges against him???
If this is what happening,I think Sinkapore will hve hard time to bring back ppls' confident in the judicial syatem!!!
Better leave Sinkapore soon!!!!
-
They take ages to investigate, then the trial has been going on for so long, yet cannot get him.
What a waste of taxpayers' money! -
I personally do not like Durain, but lets drop the case and move on, why? this case have enough bad publicity for all charity groups and they are the ones that suffer most, those people in real need.
TT's method of raising funds is not exactly correct but at least he really jump for joy when there is a large sum coming in; even though he benefits from these funds, the funds also benefit many patient who really need the cash to keep them alive.
Although all of us might not agreed with what he had done, but he also certainly bring alot of good out of people living here; with the large publicity and hsows, alot of us are willing to come out money to help those in need. And i think people living in this island is one of the most generous lot.
So lets begones be begones, and like the chinese saying; if we don't give the monk face at least give the buddha some face. I don't care who will look back if TT is convicted, I just know if this carry's on, alot of NKF patients will have a hard time. -
thats whyOriginally posted by IIOOII:I personally do not like Durain, but lets drop the case and move on, why? this case have enough bad publicity for all charity groups and they are the ones that suffer most, those people in real need.
TT's method of raising funds is not exactly correct but at least he really jump for joy when there is a large sum coming in; even though he benefits from these funds, the funds also benefit many patient who really need the cash to keep them alive.
Although all of us might not agreed with what he had done, but he also certainly bring alot of good out of people living here; with the large publicity and hsows, alot of us are willing to come out money to help those in need. And i think people living in this island is one of the most generous lot.
So lets begones be begones, and like the chinese saying; if we don't give the monk face at least give the buddha some face. I don't care who will look back if TT is convicted, I just know if this carry's on, alot of NKF patients will have a hard time.
many patients need their money to save LIVES.
but if that farking black bastard were to get away with embezzlement, i dont believe in justice in Singapore anymore. At the end of the day, people with really good connections still win. Whats the point of CPIB? -
can when you are one of "them."Originally posted by pqr:can change his statment just like that one meh??
good case study, good case refer in the future. all who corrupt will walk away free. planning own exit.... get someone to give 1 statement at CPIB and change during court session.
this case was done in the other way round from the start, expected what is the out come.
criminal and civil case at one go. a norm will have the criminal case trial fist follow by the civil pursue.
found guilty at the criminal trial, jail. he will have to appear cuff on when civil charge serve against him.
dear Singaporean, corruption is the way.... CPIB = toothless tiger in this case. too high profile, too many ppl involve. change of statement will not get into trouble from now on.
hip hip hooray... well done. -
CSJ was convicted of cheating his NUS Faculty for falsifying his claim for taxi fares - travelling from Point A to Point B, when the Faculty Head claimed that the same journey could have been done at a cheaper fare rate of less than a Dollar - with no consideration given to the conditions of time and traffic of both different routes are the same !!!
CSJ was also charged for cheating the NUS Faculty for postage claims in sending his Thesis abroad, without declaring that his wife's research was included as part of his work, and the postage amounted to less than $50.00 !!!
Both of these claims were already approved by the Head of the Faculty, and with the payments already made one year before the - Election of 1997 - a significant one full year before CSJ decided to enter politics, ignoring the advice of his NUS Faculty Head - a Member of Parliament for the Ruling Party.
Comparing the difference of the PEANUTS paid, is it amazing that the differences in POLITICS is so distinct in the manner of prosecution towards both parties ?
This clearly shows the hypocrisy of the politics practised by the POWER OF ONE. -
i think NKF will just have to shut down. the whole charity show on TV was wrong. it just change the meaning of CHARITY. even my friends are moving away from ren ci. fact is all moving away from this so call CHARITY.
KNN, i can't say i am been paid peanuts due to this case. 
now been paid dirt. 
-
Not surprising at all.
The laws are more protective of the rich, the privileged and the elite -
Different camp la. If CSJ on the same camp, then he will not end up like thatOriginally posted by Atobe:CSJ was convicted of cheating his NUS Faculty for falsifying his claim for taxi fares - travelling from Point A to Point B, when the Faculty Head claimed that the same journey could have been done at a cheaper fare rate of less than a Dollar - with no consideration given to the conditions of time and traffic of both different routes are the same !!!
CSJ was also charged for cheating the NUS Faculty for postage claims in sending his Thesis abroad, without declaring that his wife's research was included as part of his work, and the postage amounted to less than $50.00 !!!
Both of these claims were already approved by the Head of the Faculty, and with the payments already made one year before the - Election of 1997 - a significant one full year before CSJ decided to enter politics, ignoring the advice of his NUS Faculty Head - a Member of Parliament for the Ruling Party.
Comparing the difference of the PEANUTS paid, is it amazing that the differences in POLITICS is so distinct in the manner of prosecution towards both parties ?
This clearly shows the hypocrisy of the politics practised by the POWER OF ONE. -
i totally lost faith in singapore judicial system.
-
Please lor... This is an expected outcome.
-
I am curious ... do you have any article regarding this?Originally posted by Atobe:CSJ was convicted of cheating his NUS Faculty for falsifying his claim for taxi fares - travelling from Point A to Point B, when the Faculty Head claimed that the same journey could have been done at a cheaper fare rate of less than a Dollar - with no consideration given to the conditions of time and traffic of both different routes are the same !!!
CSJ was also charged for cheating the NUS Faculty for postage claims in sending his Thesis abroad, without declaring that his wife's research was included as part of his work, and the postage amounted to less than $50.00 !!! -
It is not what you believe that counts.
It is what you can prove in court.
If the prosecution cannot prove its case, the judge has no choice but to free the accused. It is not the judge's fault if his judgment is not according to what you expect.
When you commit murder, and it cannot be proven, would you expect to be hanged. You would walk out of court smiling. So why can't you allow the same courtesy to others.
I am sure when the prosecution prove its case, TT Durai would be punished in accordance with the law. If the case is not proven, because the defence counsel is excellent, then I don't wish for TT Durai to be punished by the court just to satisfy me. -
It will be nice if we have this kind of court where the judgment will be fair and not swayed by political power.Originally posted by mancha:It is not what you believe that counts.
It is what you can prove in court.
If the prosecution cannot prove its case, the judge has no choice but to free the accused. It is not the judge's fault if his judgment is not according to what you expect.
When you commit murder, and it cannot be proven, would you expect to be hanged. You would walk out of court smiling. So why can't you allow the same courtesy to others.
I am sure when the prosecution prove its case, TT Durai would be punished in accordance with the law. If the case is not proven, because the defence counsel is excellent, then I don't wish for TT Durai to be punished by the court just to satisfy me.
How objective and fair will our judges be in hearing politically motivated defamation suit against oppositions or people who are threats to the government because they are able to tell the truths.
How true is this presumed fairness of the judges in our politically motivated defamation suits against people who criticised the ruling party during or prior to elections ?
Will the judges be able to exercise their judgments fairly, independently and have they done so in the defamation suit against Tan Liang Hong?
There are many frivolous politically motivated defamation suits which could be dismissed without defendents being called to answer charges as it is more than obvious that the suits were politically motivated or alleged remarks made in the course of justifiable public discussions during heated electioneering?
How objective are the judges in not allowing themselves to be influenced by ministers' prior defence of durai in earlier NKF denials over many issues like the level of reserve and ratio of patients' subsidies and Peanut lady's remark on Durai's salary in this instance?