Quantcast
Channel: The Real Singapore - Opinions
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 5115

Roy Ngerng and his lawyer says PM’s Press Secretary lied? Let's take a close look!

$
0
0
<pic credit: TodayOnline>
Roy Ngerng does not want to be cross-examined (Where the opposing Lawyer asks counter questions after a witness has given evidence in court)
 
According to the Straits Times news report “High Court orders Roy Ngerng to pay PM Lee $29,000 in costs for defamation suit” (Jan 13) – “Ms Chang said the dates for the subsequent hearings – which will determine the amount of damages payable to Mr Lee – are not confirmed.
 
She added that Mr Ngerng’s lawyer indicated at the hearing that Mr Ngerng did not want to be cross-examined.
 
“The judge directed his lawyer to confirm whether he would be giving evidence by 30 January 2015,” she said.
 
“PM Lee stands ready to be cross-examined”
 
“PM Lee stands ready to be cross-examined, a position he has earlier communicated to the Court”. – But in contrast, according to Roy Ngerng’s article of 12 January (”
The Singapore Prime Minister’s Press Secretary and State-Controlled Media Lied about What My Lawyer and I Said“)
 
PM’s press secretary lied?
 
- “The prime minister’s press secretary Chang Li Lin and state-controlled media lied about what my lawyer and I said at the pre-trial conference today.

However, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s press secretary Chang Li Lin lied about what my lawyer and I said.

Media also lied?

The state-controlled media also lied by carrying her statement.

However, this is not true.

I have never said that I do not want to be cross-examined.

In fact, I have told my lawyer that I am ready to be cross-examined and to also cross-examine the prime minister.

Not only that, Ms Chang also changed her initial statement.

“PM Lee stands ready to be cross-examined, a position he has maintained right from the beginning” – changed to “a position he has earlier communicated to the Court.”?

In her initial statement, she said, “PM Lee stands ready to be cross-examined, a position he has maintained right from the beginning.”

However, she later changed the statement to say, “PM Lee stands ready to be cross-examined, a position he has earlier communicated to the Court.”

Why did Ms Chang initially said that the prime minister was ready to be cross-examined “right from the beginning” to “a position he has earlier communicated to the Court”?

So, he did not actually agree to be cross-examined “right from the beginning”?

Moreover, why did Ms Chang and the state-controlled media put words into my mouth?

In fact, I have told the media who attended today’s hearing and pre-trial conference that I am ready to be cross-examined.

The Straits Times, Today and Zaobao were there today. So were free and more respectable media AFP and The Online Citizen.

The state-controlled media were there today but why did they carry an inaccurate statement by the prime minister’s secretary?

This is not the first time that the state-controlled media has put words into my mouth and attempted to put me in a bad light.”

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

Why quote third party who was not at the hearing?

Since as I understand it – that the press secretary was not at the court hearing on 12 January – why is the media quoting her, instead of the lawyers and Roy Ngerng, who were interviewed by all the media including the Straits Times, at the court?
 
1 media, 2 media – all “sloppy”reporting?
 
Now, if one newspaper is “sloppy” in its reporting – what about the rest of the media?
 
Today was slightly better (but still also quoted the press secretary) as it said ““Mr Ngerng’s lawyer indicated at the hearing that Mr Ngerng did not want to be cross-examined. The judge directed his lawyer to confirm whether he would be giving evidence by 30 January 2015.
 
PM Lee stands ready to be cross-examined, a position he has earlier communicated to the Court.”
 
Mr Ravi, however, told reporters after the hearing that his client would likely take the stand, as would several lawyers from Mr Singh’s firm Drew & Napier.”
 
International media never quote “third party” as if it is a “fact” 
 
In stark contrast – Yahoo News did not say anything about Roy Ngerng not wanting to be cross-examined and the PM “stands ready to be cross-examined”".
 
Media “caught with pants down”?
 
Could it be another instance of 150th Press Freedom ranking reporting?

Kenna “caught with their pants down” once again – is it!

 

Win battles lose war

TRS contributor

 


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 5115

Trending Articles