[ad_1]
During the nine years beginning in 2007 that he worked for Changi Airport Group Chairman Liew Mun Leong and his family, Indonesian Parti Liyani maintained a relatively harmonious relationship with its members.
They gave him generous red packages and increased his monthly salary from $ 300 to $ 600.
However, from time to time, she would clash with her employer’s son, Karl, over his housework at the Chancery Lane family home.
Things got hotter when Karl Liew moved his family in March 2016 to a nearby home.
The domestic worker was told to go there to help with the housework and to clean her office elsewhere.
The frequency with which Ms Parti was asked to do the additional work is discussed.
Liew Mun Leong’s wife, Mrs. Ng Lai Peng, said she paid the maid $ 20 on each of the three occasions she asked her to work at her son’s home.
But Parti, 46, said she cleaned Karl Liew’s office once a week for about a year. He said he received $ 10 for two or three days of work and that the pay was not regular.
Disputes arose over his refusal to clean a toilet at home and cook extra food for him.
On October 28, 2016, when Mr. Karl Liew told Ms. Parti that she had been fired, she replied, “I know why. You are angry (sic) because I refused to clean your toilet.”
Having two hours to pack before returning home to Indonesia, he became angry and threatened to file a complaint with the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) about the illegal work deployments.
Two days later, while she was back in Indonesia, Mr. Liew and her son made a police report after the family allegedly found her belongings in three boxes, which Mr. Karl Liew had agreed to pay to send to her.
In his opinion, Judge Chan Seng Onn noted that “some time before her dismissal”, Ms Parti had expressed her dissatisfaction that she had to do additional work.
“There is reason to believe that the Liew family, realizing their unhappiness, took the first preventative step to terminate their employment suddenly without giving them enough time to pack, hoping that Parti would not use the time to complain to Mom. “.
Once she made clear, upon being fired, her desire to file a complaint with MOM, the Liew family “followed up with the police report to ensure that her return would be prevented,” the judge said. “In my opinion, the Liew family could not have made a police report if Parti had not expressly threatened on October 28, 2016 to report the matter to MOM.”
Judge Chan did not believe the testimony of Elder Mr. Liew, who said he had decided to fire her because things had disappeared “over the years.”
The judge said there was no evidence that any new items were found to be missing that would require the immediate and sudden dismissal of the maid while Mr. Liew was abroad.
Judge Chan examined in detail the explanations given by Ms. Parti and family members about the various items allegedly stolen. The judge noted that many showed “some form of dysfunction.”
He believed Ms. Parti, who said that many of the items had been discarded by the Liew family, some of them during Mr. Karl Liew’s move.
He said it was “not unimaginable” that things were thrown away in the process.
“Parti’s explanation is neither incredible nor uncommon, especially when you consider this in light of the Liew family’s opulence, Karl’s willingness to give away the black bag containing suits, jackets and pants, the neatness and orderliness of the inside the house … indicating that the Liew family were not hoarders. “
The family had also recorded a video of the items removed from the boxes after Ms. Parti left.
In the video, Madam Ng said she wanted a Karung Guni man to help her “move” them. Her son replied, “You cannot bring the karung guni man here. They are still his things, Mom.”
Judge Chan said this indicated that the Liew family intended to throw away the items. “I don’t have the slightest impression that the Liew family is in the habit of keeping old, unwanted or damaged items around the house and not throwing them away.”
Ms. Parti has a further pending charge, which is the possession of items, including wallets and ez-link cards, that she suspects were obtained fraudulently.
What the judge said about …
RESULT OF DISTRICT JUDGE OLIVIA LOW ON THE CREDIBILITY OF LIES
I find the judge’s eventual conclusion that the prosecution witnesses (including Karl Liew) were largely credible with clear, convincing and consistent evidence, is simply unwarranted and, in my judgment, against the weight of the evidence.
Karl’s dishonesty on the stand was clearly evident from his testimony and the judge was unable to fully appreciate his decision to amend the second count in relation to Karl’s lack of credibility.
The fact that Karl lied about particular elements in the second amended count not only tarnishes his credibility as a witness, but also affects the convictions for the elements of the second count that are based solely on Karl’s testimony.
AN ‘INCOMPLETE DEMONSTRATION’ AT TRIAL
On appeal, the prosecution admitted and agreed with the defense that during the trial that followed, there were already difficulties with the functionality of the Pioneer DVD player to play the DVD disc, but not to play the clip recorded on the disc. hard drive from the DVD player. .
However, the fact that such difficulties existed with the functionality of the Pioneer DVD player was not disclosed to the defendant prior to Parti’s cross-examination of the operating conditions of the Pioneer DVD player or to the judge in the subsequent trial.
If the prosecution had known of this defect in Pioneer’s DVD player during the trial then they should have fully disclosed it.
The trial court could be misled into thinking that the Pioneer DVD player was in good working order when Parti was questioned (and unfairly) on the grounds that the DVD player was still in good working order after a Incomplete demonstration of its important functionalities during testing.
DEDICATION OF DEFENSE LAWYER ANIL BALCHANDANI
His written presentations were detailed and with good footnotes; his arguments were persuasive; He carefully explored all aspects of the prosecution case and examined the voluminous evidence in the transcripts to clearly mount his client’s defense both at trial and on appeal; analyzed in great detail the grounds for the decision of the trial judge to present them on the areas in which the trial judge had erred in his conclusions; She handled all of these matters unaided and had shown a lot of dedication in her pro bono work on this case.
JUSTICE CHAN SENG ONN
[ad_2]
