SINGAPORE: Ms Raeesah Khan, the former Workers ‘ Party ( WP ) Member of Parliament ( MP), testified for a second day in the trial of WP secretary-general Pritam Singh on Tuesday ( Oct 15 ).
Ms. Khan, 31, is the first witness in Singh’s case after allegedly fabricating testimony to a Committee of Privileges ( COP) investigating a lie she told in parliament in August 2021.
On her next day on the witness have, Singh’s attorney Andre Jumabhoy opened his cross-examination of Ms Khan, seeking to put her as a habitual liar.
Below are five key moments from her evidence.
Thought” DEFEATED AND BETRAYED” BY PARTY LEADERS
Ms Khan said she felt “very defeated and betrayed” at a Nov 29, 2021 meet with a WP administrative panel comprising Singh, party head Sylvia Lim and vice-chair Ali Manap.
After Ms. Khan had admitted to lying in parliament, the WP set up a administrative panel to examine her behavior.
Ms. Khan claimed that the three party leaders had criticised her performance as an MP during her first meet with the section on November 8, 2021, and that she had not been prepared for this.
Ms. Khan, who is currently being examined by the prosecution, claimed she was shocked that the panel found wrong with her for not submitting much political issues and not appearing in parliament or on the floor.
Ms. Khan requested a second meeting with the board in order to learn more about the difficulties she encountered as an MP and how she felt she had succeeded.
She described this second meeting on November 29, 2021 as” I felt quite defeated and betrayed” because the people I admire the most and trust the most turned around and criticized me on behalf of the disciplinary panel.
On the subject of her stay in parliament, the party leaders “almost pretending that they had been guiding me,” she continued.
KHAN RESIGNED DUE TO LACK OF SUPPORT
Following the second meeting with the administrative board, Ms. Khan decided that the party had “definitely” request her resignation.  ,
On November 30, 2021, she left the WP and joined the MPs.  ,
When asked why she made the decision to withdraw, Ms. Khan claimed to have pondered the fact that she had lost the support of the party authority and did not have the help of the Sengkang team.  ,  ,
She informed the party’s central executive committee ( CEC ) of her decision during a meeting, according to the prosecution.  ,
During this appointment, she told the CEC that she was “very terrible to resign” because she “really loved the framework and meet people”.  ,
” I LIED TO THE WHOLE Land”
Earlier in his cross-examination, Mr Jumabhoy said Ms Khan told lies “non-stop”, whether in her false tale in congress, in her information to the COP or in court proceedings.
” You are in fact a fake, right”? he asked her. ” Yes, I’ve lied”, she replied. He continued:” You tell lies non-stop, do n’t you”?
After the fake story about accompanying a sexual abuse victim to a police station, Ms. Khan took her through text messages she exchanged with him on August 3, 2021.
For instance, Ms. Khan claimed the function occurred” three years ago, in the first part of the month” and that she met the victim “at the vehicle stop near the Bedok police place” when Singh asked her for more details that day for information.
” You’re adding more facts to support a lie”, said Mr Jumabhoy. ” So it’s a lie heaped upon a rest. And then it’s going to be wrapped up in more lies, is n’t it”?
Ms Khan replied indeed to his comments.
The lawyer added that Ms. Khan’s ability to lie more than once in a single message was “pretty remarkable.” ” I would n’t call it impressive, I would call it fear”, she said.
When Mr Jumabhoy asked whom more Ms Khan had lied to about her false story, she said:” Because I made that statement in parliament, I lied to the whole state”.
” YOU SEEM TO BE ADDING NEW THINGS”
Mr. Jumabhoy’s concerns primarily focused on apparent contradictions between what Ms. Khan said to the COP and her testimony in court.  ,
He inquired about Ms. Khan’s claim that her former administrative assistant, Ms. Loh Pei Ying, had allegedly asked her to tell the truth, while she claimed in court that Ms. Loh had never given her for an explanation.
Deputy Principal District Judge Luke Tan intervened in two ways in response to which, he pointed out that the information that Mr. Jumabhoy cited did not support Ms. Loh’s assertions.
Eventually, Ms. Khan testified in court that she had never heard from Ms. Loh or ex-WP member Yudhishthra Nathan regarding telling the truth.  ,
Additionally, Mr. Jumabhoy accused Ms. Khan of providing new knowledge to her judicial memory.  ,
He referred to Ms Khan’s evidence on Monday that at the end of the Aug 8, 2021 meet, Ms Lim had asked her if her father was waiting in the car outside Singh’s home. He made the point that Ms. Khan had n’t previously mentioned this.  ,
” It’s been three years now, and you seem to be adding new items three years after the function”, he said.
How did you suddenly come up with that after having no memory and never mentioning what ( Ms. Lim ) says?
Ms. Khan claimed that she might have never mentioned this in her COP witness but could have made it clear in her statement to the authorities.
ATTEMPT TO Indict KHAN’S Payment
Towards the close of Tuesday’s proceedings, Mr Jumabhoy sought to oust Ms Khan’s record as a witness, and she was asked to step out of the courtroom during these claims.  ,
The defense raised two possible stuff conflicts in the program, contrasting Ms. Khan’s police statement from May 12, 2022 with what she said in her court evidence on Monday.
By the time the reading was adjourned, Judge Tan had already made a decision on the software, but he still allowed Mr. Jumabhoy to question Ms. Khan based on two responses she gave in her police affirmation when the reading resumes on Wednesday.
These relate to her account of conference with Singh on October 3, 2021, and whether or not Singh had stated that he thought Ms. Khan’s stay may be brought up suddenly in parliament.
On Monday, Ms Khan had testified that Singh ,” something along the lines of – I do n’t think the issue will come up but if it does come up he’s not going to judge me for continuing with the narrative”.
But in her police speech, she had said that Singh said “knowing them, they may bring it up again”, referring to her rest.