Novena Church exorcism suit begins
-
just throw the case out la. sigh.
i'm not really following this story, so abit blur. what do u mean she lying under oath? -
ever watch movies where the fella goes up to the stand and swears to tell the truth?
if the person is not telling the truth to the court, that is lying under oath... it is perjury... -
The Electric New Paper :
LAWYER ALLEGES:
SHE GAVE SON STEROIDS
Defence paints Madam Amutha as a domineering mother
A PUSHY mother who forced her will upon her children, even giving steroids to her son so he could excel in sports.
By Crystal Chan
02 November 2007
A PUSHY mother who forced her will upon her children, even giving steroids to her son so he could excel in sports.
This was how the defence portrayed Madam Amutha Valli, 51, as the Novena Church 'exorcism' suit resumed in the High Court yesterday.
She is suing the church, two of its priests and six church members over what she claims was a forced 'exorcism'.
Her children, Miss Subashini Jeyabal, 22, and Mr Jairajkumar Jeyabal, 28, depict her as a devoted and supportive mother in their affidavits.
Madam Amutha, an ex-national walker, also said in her own affidavit that she coached her children for international walking competitions.
But lawyer Denis Tan, who represents three of the church members, painted her as a domineering and eccentric woman who was estranged from her own family.
Mr Tan noted that Madam Amutha has seven siblings - three sisters and four brothers - but none was seen to have visited her during her convalescence after the 'exorcism'.
Mr Tan asked Miss Subashini, testifying for the third day: 'Am I right to say that your mother pushed you and your brother very hard in your career?'
She agreed, and Mr Tan asked if Mr Jairajkumar was a reluctant sportsman who was forced by Madam Amutha to excel in athletics.
In March 1998, Mr Jairajkumar announced he would be quitting walking to study, having deferred his A-Levels in 1997 to focus on the SEA Games.
ABUSIVE
Miss Subashini said her brother lost interest in the sport after the World Junior Championships that year.
To emphasise his point that Madam Amutha was a domineering parent, Mr Tan alleged that she pressured her son so much that she gave him steroids.
Miss Subashini claimed she was unaware of this.
Mr Anthony Lee, representing the other three church members, also painted Madam Amutha as an abusive woman.
He asked Miss Subashini why her brother quit during his third year of an engineering course at the National University of Singapore.
She replied that he was unhappy, but Mr Lee said there was more to it.
He claimed Mr Jairajkumar's decision was to spite his mother as she disapproved of his then-girlfriend.
Mr Lee asked: 'Do you know your mother called the girl's parents and abused them over the phone, and your brother was so ashamed of her?'
Miss Subashini, a student, said she did not know about this incident, and denied Mr Lee's allegation that her mother was a drunkard who took sleeping pills.
In her usual combative demeanour, she said: 'My mum was only admitted to the Institute of Mental Health for alcoholism for only a day. How does that make her a drunkard?'
SNAKE-LIKE BEHAVIOUR
Another point that came up in yesterday's hearing was Madam Amutha's skilfulness in behaving like a snake - something that was frequently mentioned in court earlier.
Mr Tan claimed that around 1994, Madam Amutha trained some children for an Indian dance performance, and one of the children was a Chinese boy who stayed with her temporarily.
She had been paid by the boy's parents to care for him while they were overseas.
He said: 'Am I correct to say that he was dressed up as an Indian boy, with a tilak (Hindu symbol) on his forehead?
'He was taught to wriggle like a snake and move upwards like a cobra. Am I right?'
While Miss Subashini said she had not seen such a performance before, Mr Lee said he has witnesses to rebut her denial.
Mr Lee cross-examined Miss Subashini at the start of yesterday's hearing and said the dance was held at Ang Mo Kio Community Centre.
Mr Lee said Madam Amutha choreographed the dances and during one rehearsal, she went into a trance and moved like a snake on the floor.
When Miss Subashini denied ever seeing her mother going into trances, Mr Lee said: 'Your Honour, we wish to apply for rebuttal witnesses. We had contact with potential witnesses who came forward.'
The cross-examination was one of several dramatic scenes in an eagerly anticipated day, as Madam Amutha was supposed to take the stand yesterday.
Mr Tan even compared Madam Amutha's allegations with a scene from a movie.
When Mr Tan's questioning drew objections from Madam Amutha's lawyer, Mr R S Bajwa, Justice Lee Seiu Kin said 'rigorous cross-examination' was necessary as the trial was about finding out the truth.
Earlier, Mr Tan asked Miss Subashini why she did not call the police when Madam Amutha was supposedly taken into a room in the church's pastoral centre for the 'exorcism'.
Her reply?
She did not think anything was amiss as the family was in a place of worship.
'Now, I think we should have called the police - we would have probably avoided all this,' she said.
Often during the cross-examination, there was laughter from the public gallery, and Mr Bajwa raised this with Justice Lee, saying the crowd was intimidating Miss Subashini.
Justice Lee then warned members of the public not to make any noise, adding: 'If necessary, I will clear the gallery.' -
The Electric New Paper :
Madam Amutha shouts while in court:
Don't strangle me, LEAVE ME ALONE
She becomes hysterical, then says sorry to judge
ALL she had to do was to confirm that her affidavit was correct.
By Crystal Chan
03 November 2007
ALL she had to do was to confirm that her affidavit was correct.
But as her lawyer read it out, Madam Amutha Valli Krishnan became hysterical and began yelling.
The mother of two, 51, an ex-national walker, is suing the Novena Church, two of its priests and six church members over what she claims was a forced 'exorcism'.
She took the stand on Wednesday, but was crying so much that Justice Lee Seiu Kin adjourned the trial for a day.
While she did not wail yesterday, the case took a dramatic turn when her lawyer, Mr R S Bajwa, narrated how she was supposedly throttled by Mr Nasrom Abdullah.
She began shouting: 'Don't strangle me, don't strangle me! Leave me alone!'
Mr Nasrom, a tennis coach, is one of the nine parties she is suing. He is a member of the church choir.
Mr Bajwa tried to get Madam Amutha to relax and tell her side of the story.
But she ignored her lawyer and proceeded to show Justice Lee how Mr Nasrom allegedly pushed her face.
WAILED
She also hit her forehead and wailed as Mr Bajwa related how Father Simon Tan supposedly watched her urinate.
Madam Amutha said: 'He (Father Tan) said he wanted to hear me urinate to confirm whether I was Valerie or an evil spirit.'
Madam Amutha is also known as Mrs Valerie Jeyabal. Her husband, Mr Jeyabal Suppiah, is a taxi driver.
Mr Bajwa asked her to identify the defendants.
Pointing Mr Nasrom out, she shouted: 'The botak (Malay for 'bald') man strangled me!
'The... man strangled me down!
'You strangled me - you call yourself a church (sic)?'
She then held her hands around her neck to demonstrate how Mr Nasrom supposedly choked her.
Following her outburst, Madam Amutha shouted at Father Simon Tan and Father Jacob Ong: 'The red shirt man (sic) is Simon! The man with the glasses is Jacob!'
The three men were all seated on a sofa behind the lawyers' table.
However, when Mr Bajwa asked if the other five defendants were present, she could not pick them out.
It is not clear if those defendants - Mr Francis Chian, Mr Benny Tan, Mr Cheong Lai Meng, Ms Choo Joke Li and Mr Koh Cheng Swee - were in court.
Realising that she had created a scene, Madam Amutha apologised to Justice Lee and asked for a minute to compose herself.
Justice Lee told Madam Amutha to try to answer the questions and ask for clarification if necessary.
He said: 'And if you're tired and need a rest, let me know.'
Acting for the church and Father Tan, lawyer Tito Isaac was the first to grill Madam Amutha.
While Mr Isaac was aggressive when cross-examining her daughter, Miss Subashini Jeyabal, last Wednesday, he was gentler with Madam Amutha.
He said: 'If I'm going too fast, let me know. I'm not going to hurt you.
'This is a temple of justice - the safest place in Singapore. There are police officers here.'
Mr Isaac then asked Madam Amutha about her family, saying he wanted to talk about 'happier things'.
PREOCCUPIED
She appeared preoccupied with the 'exorcism' and, when asked for her children's birth dates, replied '10th of August, 2004', the date of the alleged exorcism.
When asked about her family, she said she did not love her husband as her late father arranged the marriage.
She also claimed not to know what the Morse Code is, even though she was a Morse Code operator at Telecom.
Mr Isaac then asked about her stays at the National University Hospital for mental problems.
NUH medical records show Madam Amutha was hospitalised for 28 days in December 1986 and in January 1987.
Three days after being discharged, on 21 Jan 1987, she was re-admitted, after attempting suicide.
But Madam Amutha insisted that she had never gone to NUH.
When Mr Isaac showed her doctor's notes, she said: 'What is this? Where did you get it from? I didn't give birth in NUH. I gave birth in KKH.'
Mr Isaac asked if she remembered being away from her family. She had been hospitalised during Christmas in 1986 and New Year's Day in 1987.
Again, she claimed she had never been to NUH and said: 'I was only in Tan Tock Seng Hospital for 32 days (after the 'exorcism').'
But there was one thing about which she was quite clear - and apparently proud.
When asked which school her son, Mr Jairajkumar Jeyabal, 28, had attended, Madam Amutha replied: 'RI (Raffles Institution). He went to RI because it's a popular school.' -
i think the woman is barking mad...
-
God will punish her and her shameless family. I can't wait to see that. PUI!Originally posted by the Bear:i think the woman is barking mad... -
let God decide what He wants to do..
we can just watch these things and learn.. maybe we can avoid these people out there
but sheesh, that family's a mess.. and then some -
My conclusion...she's mental. No doubt, losing this case for sure.
-
Let's not be so quick to condemn, the Lord will eventually forgive her.
-
The question is whether she is really insane or just pretending so as to con innocent people out of $. If she is so cuckoo, can she think of suing the priests and parishoners? If she is really mental, then obviously someone put her up to this. So far, the only strong contenders seem to be her lying daughter who thinks if she acts aggressive enough then people will mistaken it for truth! (ha, we not stupid like you hor!) or the one who has great influence on her, her lover whom she calls "brother".
I hope when the case resumes on the 14th, the judge will throw it out and make the family issue a public apology. I doubt the Church or the parishoners will countersue her (pity!) but they do need to admit they are lying and apologise. -
I never following the news but I wonder if she is siao siao one izzit ?
-
Nov 14, 2007
Woman visited hospitals, clinic 7 times in 2 days after alleged exorcism
By Jermyn Chow
MADAM Amutha Valli went to two hospitals and a private clinic seven times in two days after the alleged forced exorcism on her three years ago, the High Court heard on Wednesday.
This was revealed by her sworn brother, Mr Resham Singh, during cross-examination by a defence counsel at the resumed hearing of the exorcism suit brought against the Redemptorist Order which runs the Novena Church in Thomson Road, two priests and six churchgoers.
Madam Valli is seeking compensation for the trauma she suffered from the alleged ritual on Aug 10, 2004.
Mr Singh, 38, a private equity investor, said since the incident, he had taken the plaintiff to various hospitals and clinics more than 50 times.
He said the following morning after the alleged forced exorcism, Madam Valli went to the Tan Tock Seng Hospital twice, and also saw her a doctor at Flame Tree Clinic.
Later that night, she called for an ambulance to send her to the National University Hospital.
The next day on Aug 12, she went back to Flame Tree Clinic three times between 9 am and 7 pm. Mr Singh agreed with senior counsel Jimmy Yim, who is representing Father Jacob Ong, one of the two priests accused of carrying out the ritual, that Madam Valli was given painkillers and sedatives on these trips to the outpatient clinics.
Part of a scam
Counsel then put it to Mr Singh that these visits were an attempt to build up a case against the church and defendents, and were part of a 'scam'.
When Mr Singh insisted that Madam Valli was unwell, counsel said: 'There's such a thing as lawyer shopping. But she is doctor shopping.'
Mr Singh shot back: 'There's such a thing as seeking second opinion.'
Counsel also drew attention to discrepancies in Mr Singh's testimony, and questioned his relationship with Madam Valli and her family.
He noted that besides staying over at her family's Ang Mo Kio flat two to three times a week, he also had meals with her at coffee shops and regularly accompanied her to temples.
Mr Singh said he spent time with Madam Valli not as an 'act of kindness but out of a duty to the family'.
Daughter denies intimacy
At an earlier hearing before the case was adjourned on Nov 1, Madam Valli's daughter, Miss Subashini Jeyabal, 22, a student, had denied that her mother was intimate with Mr Singh.
But a private investigator had reported that Madam Valli was emotionally attached to Mr Singh and that the two had even travelled together.
According to Miss Subashini, Mr Singh is her 'father's good friend's son' and he began staying at the family's Ang Mo Kio flat only early this year.
No sign of Mdm Valli
Madam Valli did not show up in court on Wednesday when the hearing resumed after a two-week break. Her lawyer, Mr R.S. Bajwa told the court that she has been warded at Changi General Hospital and was 'certified unfit' to attend court until Nov 20.
The hearing was adjourned on Nov 1 after Madam Valli repeatedly said she could not recall her family history and past medical records when cross-examined by defence lawyers.
It is not known when or whether Madam Valli will be back in court for the hearing, which is expected to stretch until next year.
Hearing continues on Thursday. -
Seems so...Originally posted by Baby_Nutz:I never following the news but I wonder if she is siao siao one izzit ? -
not just merely siao siao... she's probably going to howl at the moon soon..
wah piang.. last time go and drink adrian lim's blood.. and all these weird thingsOriginally posted by Honeybunz:Seems so... -
Humm this description like werewolf sia... Haha... I watch too much movie liao...Originally posted by the Bear:not just merely siao siao... she's probably going to howl at the moon soon..
wah piang.. last time go and drink adrian lim's blood.. and all these weird things -
now her dirty laundry all get washed in public......never think, sad case
-
Nov 15, 2007
Woman's 'brother' in exorcism case: I wasn't negligent in caring for her
By Jermyn Chow
A DEFENCE lawyer in the continuing exorcism trial has acused Mr Resham Singh, the sworn 'brother' of plaintiff Madam Amutha Valli, of being negligent in caring for her - because he allegedly stood by while doctors prescribed her a whole bulk of sleeping pills and sedatives, the High Court heard on Thursday.
Madam Amutha Vali is suing the Redemptorist Order which runs the Novena Church in Thomson Road, two priests and six churchgoers to seek compensation for the trauma she suffered from the alleged exorcism ritual on Aug 10, 2004.
On Thursday, Mr Resham Singh returned to the witness box and was cross-examined by defence counsel Tito Isaac.
Mr Isaac told the court that even while Madam Valli was hospitalised for a week in Nov 2004 at Tan Tock Seng Hospital (TTSH) for overdosing on Panadol, medical records showed she still visited private clinics repeatedly - at one period every other day - and got a bulk of sleeping pills and sedatives.
Mr Isaac then said: 'We see a pattern here... Someone has been either negligent in her care or doesn't want her to get better. But that someone seems to like her to stay hooked on drugs.'
He went on to argue that Mr Singh, who was supposed to be her constant companion, did not see fit to tell Madam Valli's doctors at the private clinics and at TTSH that she had been prescribed a large amount of drugs.
Mr Singh replied that 'she is old enough to talk to the doctors and take of herself'. He added that he was there only to accompany her.
At this point in the cross-examination, Madam Valli's daughter, Ms Subashini Jeyabal, 22, was seen shaking her head.
Robust exchange
The morning's preceedings were also dominated by a robust exchange between defence counsel Mr Isaac and Justice Lee Sieu Kin.
This arose after Madam Vali's lawyer, Mr RS Bajwa, objected to Mr Isaac's line of questioning on Mr Singh's involvement in Madam Valli's visit to TTSH and private clinics, saying 'he was casting fear' over the witness.
Justice Lee rebuffed some of Mr Bajwa's objections, telling him:' You have been interrupting a fair bit...It's a legitimate cross-examining technique... to verify the veracity of the evidence.'
He then added that 'if he (Mr Singh) is telling the truth, then he shouldn't worry' and assured Mr Bajwa that he too will be extended the same latitude when he cross-examines the witnesses.
Defence counsel then proceeded to ask for Mr Singh's and Madam Valli's passports.
Mr Singh declined, saying he felt uncomfortable giving the passports to Mr Isaac, but would not object to giving them to Madam Valli's lawyer, Mr Bajwa.
Mr Bajwa then objected to the relevance of handing over the passports, to which Justice Lee Sieu Kin replied 'Why not?'
Mr Isaac explained that they had wanted to verify the dates of the overseas trips taken by both Mr Singh and Madam Valli.
Mr Singh, from the outset, has denied being the primary caregiver of Madam Valli, although defence lawyers have established that he had always been her constant companion during her medical appointments and hospitalisations. -
[quote]Originally posted by Honeybunz:
[b]
Nov 16, 2007
'Sworn brother' changes tune, says Madam Valli's not 'his family'
By Jermyn Chow
Mr Singh (left) also denied any intimate relationship between him and Madam Valli despite Mr Tan saying that there were witnesses who said they acted inappropriately at coffee shops. -- PHOTO: ST
COMING into his third day on the witness stand, Mr Resham Singh changed his stance on the nature of his relationship with Madam Amutha Valli, as he continued to defend his lack of action during the alleged exorcism.
New details emerged when Madam Valli's 'sworn brother', Mr Resham Singh, took the witness stand again on Friday to be grilled by defence counsel Dennis Tan.
Mr Singh claimed that he had made a phone call to the police on the night of the alleged exorcism and said that he had phone records to prove it.
This was in contrast to Madam Valli's daughter, Ms Ms Subashini Jeyabal's cross-examination earlier in the trial when she said that no police calls were made that night.
Mr Tan proceeded to prompt Mr Singh on when his close relationship with Madam Vali actually started. Mr Singh replied it was the middle of 2003.
Mr Tan showed the court that Mr Singh's and Madam Valli's passports revealed they had made a trip to Sydney together from April 1 to April 10, 2003.
Mr Singh replied that he had only made the booking for the family.
He added that he was unaware of the patchy relationship that Madam Valli had with her husband.
Mr Singh also denied any intimate relationship between him and Madam Valli despite Mr Tan saying that there were witnesses who said they acted inappropriately at coffee shops.
Not family
Moving his line of questioning to the night of the alleged exorcism, Mr Tan asked Mr Singh why he did not take action against the alleged forced exorcism. Mr Singh's answer was that Madam Valli was 'not his family and they were not blood-related'.
This despite the fact that throughout the trial, Mr Singh had repeatedly maintained that he regarded Madam Valli as part of his family and made references to having a 'duty to the family'.
Mr Singh also spoke of an Indian man that was blocking the door of the room where the alleged exorcism took place, and that he felt 'helpless, fearful and overpowered' by him as well as 'by a group of 10 to 15 people singing'.
He added that he 'did not want to be violent' and referred to the people as 'fanatics'. -
i think the whole case is starting to fall apart under the weight of lies
-
Originally posted by the Bear:i think the whole case is starting to fall apart under the weight of lies
The boyfriend... I mean the sworn brother accused the lawyer, PI and doctor of being unethical and said that the witnesses at Novena were just singing the same tune cuz they are from the same church. Wah lao eh.
I can't wait to see what's going to happen next. How long can Amutha Valli remain "too sick and frail" and how many more times can she claim that she cannot recall her family? -
Here's a report from CNA last night at 2330 hrs
SINGAPORE: The "brother" of the woman at the centre of the Novena Church exorcism civil suit took the witness stand for the second day on Thursday.
51-year-old Amutha Valli Krishnan is the woman who is suing two Novena Church priests and six helpers for allegedly forcing an act of exorcism on her.
But attention in court on Thursday was focused on the so-called "good relationship" she shares with 38-year-old Resham Singh, her "sworn brother".
Mr Resham insisted that Madam Amutha Valli is like a sworn sister to him, although they share no blood ties.
But defence lawyer Anthony Lee said Mr Resham seemed to be performing the duties of a "surrogate husband", a remark objected by Mdm Amutha Valli's lawyer R S Bajwa as indecent and scandalous.
Mr Lee had coined the term after he and fellow defence lawyer Tito Isaac got Mr Resham to testify how he stayed over at Mdm Amutha Valli's house three to four times a week since 2007 and accompanied her to eat at coffeeshops.
In particular, Mr Resham appeared to be Mdm Amutha Valli's main caregiver, bringing her for medical visits at a GP clinic and the Tan Tock Seng Hospital.
Mr Resham had also testified that he had even instructed doctors at the hospital to treat Mdm Amutha Valli gently and to increase her drug dosage and keep her sedated.
Mr Resham said this was because Mdm Amutha Valli was having difficulties sleeping.
On one occasion, while being admitted to Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Mr Resham took Mdm Amutha Valli out on 'home leave'.
But they went to her family doctor where she was given more sleeping pills and sedatives.
Mr Lee said that it is strange that while being so close to Mdm Amutha Valli, Mr Resham insisted that he didn't know that she was depressed, is an alcoholic and hooked on sleeping pills.
Mr Resham replied that he did not administer the medicine to her but instead left that duty to Mdm Amutha Valli's daughter.
Mr Lee said this is a 'highly unusual' relationship and asked if there is something more that Mr Resham is not telling the court.
Mr Resham said he was just being a caring "brother".
Mr Lee then inspected Mr Resham's passport.
He also got Mr Resham to testify that he had, since 2005, been on over 10 trips.
At least six of them were trips he made alone with Mdm Amutha Valli, to Australia and Malaysia.
On Wednesday, the defence team had requested to see Mdm Amutha Valli's and Mr Resham's passports.
This was to validate Mr Resham's testimony of his close relationship with Mdm Amutha Valli, as well as her physical condition and ability to travel frequently.
While Mr Resham handed over his passport reluctantly, Mdm Amutha Valli's daughter said her mother, who is currently hospitalised at Changi General Hospital, has forgotten where she had put her passport and that the maid had it.
On Wednesday, Mr Resham had told the court that shortly after the alleged exorcism in August 2004, he had on one occasion brought Mdm Amutha Valli to The Flame Tree Medical Centre to see her doctors.
Mr Resham went on to allege that when he was called into the consultation room, he saw the doctor - Dr Tay Ser Wee - showing Mdm Amutha Valli's medical records to lawyer Justin Chan.
These are serious allegations as Mr Resham is alleging that Dr Tay may have breached medical ethics of maintaining patient's confidentiality.
Mr Resham also testified that lawyer Justin Chan later called him three times, offering legal services of his principal partner Tito Isaac, who is now representing the defendants - the Novena Church and priest Father Simon Tan.
Mr Lee said he could prove that lawyer Justin Chan never called Mr Resham. But Mr Resham said call records would support his evidence.
Mr Lee asked if Mr Resham was upset with the doctors from The Flame Tree Medical Centre because he had asked them to omit Mdm Amutha Valli's alcoholism in her medical reports to the court but they had refused to do so.
Mr Resham said this was not true.
Mr Resham also said that although he found Dr Tay's behaviour unprofessional, he had kept his silence as Mdm Amutha Valli at that time had already engaged criminal lawyer Subhas Anandan.
But Mr Subhas had later turned down the civil case as his firm does not take cases involving religious organisations.
The hearing continues. - CNA/ir -
Novena is a Roman Catholic church? Say bye bye to the church lah. It's evil !!
-
Originally posted by chrisbenoit:Novena is a Roman Catholic church? Say bye bye to the church lah. It's evil !!
-
well, hey.. your opinion
and it carries as much weight as heliumOriginally posted by chrisbenoit:Novena is a Roman Catholic church? Say bye bye to the church lah. It's evil !! -
The fatty is a law graduate btw. And a private equity investor, whatever that is. Im guessing he must be quite well off. No need to cheat money or what.