Prosecution trades barbs with law professor in sex-for-grades trial

Prosecution trades barbs with law professor in sex-for-grades trial

The prosecution and the law professor at the centre of a sex-for-grades corruption trial traded barbs in court on Wednesday, with the prosecution saying that the professor had a "flair for drama"

SINGAPORE: The prosecution on Wednesday described the law professor at the centre of a sex-for-grades trial as having a "flair for drama", and said that he was “making things up” as he went along.

Tey Tsun Hang, 41, is defending himself against six counts of corruptly obtaining gratification in the form of gifts and sex from his then-student Darinne Ko Wen Hui, 23, between May and July 2010 in return for lifting her grades.

Taking the stand for the third consecutive day, the 41-year-old traded barbs with lead prosecutor Andre Jumabhoy, who is trying to prove the voluntariness of Tey's statements to the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) .

The court will then decide if Tey’s statements are admissible at the end of the “trial within a trial”. The main corruption trial will take place thereafter.

Tey has maintained throughout the trial that he was coerced into making confessions to the CPIB, saying that six of his CPIB statements were made under duress.

Over the past two days in court, Tey demonstrated how three CPIB officers, including CPIB deputy director Teng Khee Fatt, threatened him.

Tey said that the officers humiliated him, banged on the table to intimidate him and hurled vulgarities at him.

On Tuesday, Tey said Mr Teng had fabricated some parts of his statements, which were recorded by the officer in May 2012.

Mr Teng had recorded three of Tey's six statements.

However on Wednesday Tey clarified that the word "fabricated" insinuated criminal intent and that it was not his words, but Mr Jumabhoy's.

Mr Jumabhoy then went through multiple examples of threats and oppression raised over the past two days by Tey, and pointed out that Tey never questioned Mr Teng and two of his officers when they appeared in court in January.

Tey admitted he failed to do so and said that it was "a fatal mistake" on his part, explaining that he had been on medication and had problems recollecting details.

Mr Jumabhoy then asked Tey if he thought his demonstrations over the last few days were dramatic.

Tey said he was not sure how they are perceived but insisted that he was just trying his best to recollect and tell his side of the story.

This led the prosecution to say that Tey clearly had a flair for drama, while Tey said that he was not a dramatist but a law professor.

The prosecution argued that there were two accounts of what transpired during the recording sessions, with one account told by CPIB officers in January and the other by Tey.

The prosecution insisted that Tey's account was made up, while Tey maintained that the prosecution had no basis for saying so, instead calling the CPIB a "confession-centric organisation".

- CNA/xq

- wong chee tat :)