The Singapore Prime Minister’s Press Secretary and State-Controlled Media Lied about What My Lawyer and I Said

Lee Hsien Loong Roy Ngerng 3

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.

I went to court today. The prime minister wanted the judge to ask me to pay for his legal fees for his lawyers. At the hearing in the morning, the judge asked me to pay $20,000 and an additional $9,000 in filing fees.

This is different from the actual damages that I would have to pay the prime minister himself. The prime minister has applied to ask me to pay at least $250,000 to him.

Today, the pre-trial conference was also held to decide on when the dates for the hearing on the damages will be.

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

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

“Mr Ngerng’s lawyer indicated at the hearing that Mr Ngerng did not want to be cross-examined,” Ms Chang said.

“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,” state-controlled media also reported.

However, this is not true.

Ms Chang and the state-controlled media lied.

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.

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 freer 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.

Last year, after my pre-trial conference on 17 July, The Straits Times carried an article and said, “I will continue writing about CPF in the meantime, and (Mr Ravi and I) will fight against summary judgment, to have a full-blown trial.”

However, I have never said the phrased, “full-blown trial”.

Why did the state-controlled media want to paint me in a bad light?

Moreover, why is the prime minister’s press secretary sending out a statement for the prime minister when the prime minister has taken out the defamation suit against me on his personal basis?

Why is he using state resources to speak on his behalf?

Does the prime minister not have his own mouth or his own hand? Must he always get someone else to do his dirty work?

All this time, the prime minister has the bravado to sue me but he has never had the guts to face me directly in court.

And now, he does not even have the balls to speak out on his own and is using state resources to speak up for him instead.

But this is not the first time that the prime minister’s press secretary is doing this.

Last year, when The Economist wrote an article about me, Ms Chang also wrote to rebut The Economist on 19 June.

“You referred to an “alleged ‘serious libel’” by Roy Ngerng,” Ms Chang said, referring to The Economist.

“This is not an allegation. Mr Ngerng has publicly admitted accusing Lee Hsien Loong, the prime minister, of criminal misappropriation of pension funds, falsely and completely without foundation,” she added.

“This was a grave and deliberate defamation, whether it occurred online or in the traditional media being immaterial.”

Later, on 17 July, she also said, “Mr Roy Ngerng has admitted that he has falsely defamed PM.”

Not only that, the government has also constantly used state resources to speak up for the prime minister.

Also, when well-known local critic Catherine Lim spoke up for me, Consul-General of Singapore in Hong Kong Jacky Foo rebutted her and said, “Mr Lee acted because the Government prizes integrity as the ultimate source of the trust it enjoys. A leader who does nothing when he is accused of criminally misappropriating monies from the state pension system must engender mistrust in his honesty and leadership.”

When I was sacked from my job at the Tan Tock Seng Hospital, the Ministry of Health also said, “MOH supports TTSH’s decision as Mr Ngerng’s actions show a lack of integrity and are incompatible with the values and standards of behaviour expected of hospital employees.”

However, when the government was called out for using state resources to speak up for the prime minister, the Prime Minister’s Office said,” When aspersions are cast on the integrity of the Prime Minister and his Government’s policies, an official reply from the PM’s press secretary is completely in order. This is no different from what press secretaries in most other Governments do.

“Likewise, when a foreign newspaper carries an article with misrepresentations about Singapore, it is important that our diplomatic representative defend Singapore’s interests by correcting misrepresentations and providing a balanced view. Our Consul-General in Hong Kong did just that when he responded to the South China Morning Post article.”

However, when the prime minister’s press secretary would now carry a statement solely on the defamation hearing today, is his press secretary replying because of the “integrity of the Prime Minister and his Government’s policies”?

Evidently, this is not.

Second, is the press secretary “defend(ing) Singapore’s interests by correcting misrepresentations and providing a balanced view”?

Clearly, she did not.

Ms Chang lied. The prime minister’s press secretary lied.

She did not even provide a” balanced”  view.

The state-controlled media also did not provide a “balanced” view.

The state-controlled media lied.

In addition, when I submitted my affidavit last year for the summary judgment, none of the state-controlled media wanted to report my affidavit but they would report on both the prime minister’s affidavit.

When I emailed them to ask to know why, none of them had the guts to respond to me.

I am appalled that the prime minister’s press secretary and state-controlled media would lie just to malign me.

They are also not “balanced” and have misrepresented the truth.

Also, it is very clear now that the prime minister is using state resources for his own personal uses.

The press secretary has released a statement solely on the defamation suit, solely for the prime minister’s personal agenda.

It is disgusting how the government would stoop so low to hurt me.

Advertisements

59 comments

  1. bryant3000

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

    …I don’t know whether they did. If so, you are merely and deserving getting a taste of your own medicine. 🙂

  2. Robert Teh

    Surely when pm Lee said he stood ready to be cross-examined, he must mean what he said. Not to be doctored by his secretary in such a manner. The other media present or court record and other verbatim could have witnessed this statement by PM,

  3. Dan

    Roy, have more control over your temper and your feelings. I dun say you’re wrong, but time and again it has been proven that those who are slow and steady… wins the race. Be patient, for the truth will be revealed soon, bec most of us are expecting that.

  4. Pingback: CPF blogger to pay PM Lee $29k in costs for defamation suit, way within the $110k he raised | Mothership.SG
  5. Pingback: [GLGT] WAH ROY REALLY NOTCH SCARE DIE SIA. - www.hardwarezone.com.sg
  6. teoenming

    Singapore Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong Want Teo En Ming Dead

    Singapore Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong want Teo En Ming dead. Lee Kuan Yew and Lee Hsien Loong want Teo En Ming to die young. I am only 36 years old. I do not want to die young. I want to live to a hundred years old and beyond!!! I want to live to a hundred years old and beyond!!! I want to live to a hundred years old and beyond!!!

    Teo En Ming has filed an official complaint against the Singapore Government at the United Nations Human Rights Council Branch and the International Criminal Court. Read the letter here:

    ***********************************************************************************
    ***********************************************************************************
    ***********************************************************************************
    ***********************************************************************************
    ***********************************************************************************
    ***********************************************************************************

    Teo En Ming’s Open Letter (Plea for Medical Help/Assistance) to World Leaders dated 27 Aug 2010. Read the letter here:

    http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/mpich-discuss/2010-August/007811.html

    Mr. Teo En Ming (Zhang Enming)
    Singapore Citizen
    Republic of Singapore

  7. teoenming

    Strange. Mediacorp TV Channel 8 Chinese News reported that Roy Ngerng Yi Ling is not willing to be cross-examined. But Roy has already indicated his intention to be cross-examined. Strange.

    Mr. Teo En Ming (Zhang Enming)
    Singapore Citizen

    • teoenming

      Class 95.8 FM Radio has also just reported that Roy Ngerng is not willing to be cross-examined. The news is purportedly coming from the Prime Minister’s Office.

      Mr. Teo En Ming (Zhang Enming)
      Singapore Citizen

      • teoenming

        Watch the Youtube video. It has been mentioned a few times that Roy Ngerng is willing to be cross-examined.

        Mr. Teo En Ming (Zhang Enming)
        Singapore Citizen

  8. Hallelujah

    Understand….if you have had enough…you want change…but when you look up….you see tua pek kong…version 101…..and you wonder why you are constantly hit by a pot….then you look up again…you see tua pek kong….version 102…and got potted …..

  9. Ironclad

    Roy Ngerng – you collect so much money from public to fight the case – can you tell us what happen to the money?? There is rumour that Ravi spend all the money. It is true? Have you ask Ravi ?

    • jackfruit

      Roy no problem for you lah, you would play victim again and try to get the public donate money to you. U said the govt is disgusting ? You are 30 plus, able bodied and ask people to donate $1 to you every month. This is lagi disgusting ! Even the blind man ( often seen at the tunnel linking orchard ion and tangs) makes his own money with his own effort. You are a young man (I should say, a young person) with a degree going around playing the victim card and asking for donations. Tsk Tsk Tsk …

      • christopher deSouza

        We now have a second wind in this young man Roy, unlike in the past when we allowed the only person MAN EHOUGH to stand up against the PAP and a superb lawyer to boot we allowed and watched MR JBJ bullied by lky and did nothing. So I expect the people to rally around Roy for uncovering the fraudulent activities of this government and now through Roy again all the lies blatantly being uncovered at our taxpayers monies through their boot lickers because lhl is too high up to come down to ground level and fight his own battles in spite of all the military decorations. What a shame we have a limp wrist brigadier general ( ret) but still want to bask in its glorified title……. hmmmmmm

      • All hail Roy the great, the brave, the hero, the saviour

        Yes, because Roy is trustworthy as he swear to fulfill all his promises such as being transparent and accountable for the donations, is a sensible fella who eat plain rice at cafe because he couldn’t afford the other food there and he had never heard of home cook food or coffee shop and nobody volunteered to treat him to a meal, knows how to manage his finances as he still managed to have $5000 in his savings after traveling to Norway for a holiday on a whim.

  10. Stoopig

    Who advocated the rule of law? Through the law it facilated covetiousness…then the law dictates…you shall not covet…hello…you idiot or what?

  11. Ong Cheong Teng

    Looks like pinky gonna game over liao……fancy lying and getting assistant to lie too……..sibei uselsss……we want refund…..years of refund………

  12. 50sg

    What can money not buy?

    The public service must recognise and reward the right behaviour – not just ability and performance, but also good character and moral stewardship, he added. “We make sure that public officers are paid commensurate with their job scope, so that we can insist on high standards and performance. And avoid the problems of other countries which pay officials unrealistically low wages, resulting in endemic corruption at all levels

  13. SIMPLE

    Roy, when your lawyer said that he need to take instruction from you, it means that you have not told him previously you want to be a witness.
    If you intend to be a witness right from the start, why did he need to take instruction from you? So it means either you don’t want to or you have not make up your mind.
    So before you actually indicate to the court, not to the public… it means that to the court.and to the other party.. you will be either be a witness, or you will not be witness.

    Obviously, they interpret you don’t want to because if you maintain you always want to be a witness from the start, the Ravi will just said YES, and not to take instruction from you.

    So be a witness and let PM lawyers asked you in court to confirm and repeat what you have said in your blog.

    Remember you are already guilty, not innocent until proven guilty.

  14. John Smith

    “Ms Chang lied. The prime minister’s press secretary lied.”
    “The state-controlled media lied.”

    Are you trying to increase the amount you’ll have to pay in damages by making more false allegations?

    “It is disgusting how the government would stoop so low to hurt me.”

    Have you ever considered for once, just once, that you are the one who’s disgusting for stooping so low to hurt the government? Just because you aren’t happy with how things are and you assume that everyone else feels that same and that you speak for everyone else. And when people try to tell you not to speak for them, your psychological defence mechanism of denial kicks in: “The average Singaporean would support me, so these must be PAP IBs writing against me!”

    Keep living in delusion. Meanwhile, charities will benefit from your kind donations to LHL.

  15. Bullshit Roy

    When roy and his goons forms our govt, they will sell our assets and then beg other leaders of the developed world for donations.
    Just imagine, he can con donations of more than $100,000 in three months. How much will he con when he becomes our leader for 5yrs?
    Good riddance to the honest and hardworking singaporeans…. In come the dishonest ROY and Goons…

  16. Jg

    If you let your lawyer you want to be a witness and then the lawyer told the court that he need to take instruction from you the problem is your lawyer. He did not do a good job in represent ing you

  17. Red carpet

    Obviously, without any doubt, the secretary has lied. But so what? Because of you, they have to amend the CPF scheme. You caused trouble to them so now is the payback time. They will torture you before putting you on the financial noose. But again, so what?

    • SIMPLE

      Will PM Lee, his press secretary Ms Chang Li Lin and the media sue Roy for his latest outburst?

      If they do not sue him eventually, does it mean Roy is speaking the truth?

    • Winson

      Because of Roy therefore the CPF scheme is changing ? Bwahahahaha!! You might as well say the rainbow appeared because God is moved to tears by him. Only a day dreamer can infer as such. Fantastic.

  18. Holylies

    Mortgagee sales rocket as more default on loans <<<<<< this is only the tip of the iceberg. Many are struggling financially to keep afloat as the gov manipulate the property market. Should this not be called market corruption/crime? A corruption more devasting to families and nations than petty theft or screwing a horny rabbit.

    I think we got our bearing all wrong

    • joker

      Without such tempterizing options CREATED for your consumption, would the rich able to get richer and ministers…ahem….non corruptly able to pay themselves heavenly rewards?

      But they say…. you went with your eyes open what…you Sinned…your fault what…lol…please get your doctrines right…we are highly rewarded non corrupt and saintly saviors of your soul you know…lol

      We don’t lead you to temptation and certainly not into. …definitive evil…so they have you believe

  19. Pingback: Everything you need to know about PM Press Secretary’s rebuttal to Roy Ngerng in 60s | Mothership.SG
  20. Ace

    Reading the article in mothership.sg, point 1 of the rebuttal by PM’s press secretary defending her statement by saying that Roy was not there at that point in time, I fell off my chair laughing.
    So, was the Press Secretary there? She was not.

    The difference between these 2 is that while both were not there, the Press secretary is a 3rd party where else Roy is the defendant. So better to get the truth from a 3rd party? If you are stupid enough to accept this, I am not surprise that many prefers to be dogs than a thinking person.

  21. Ann

    “The judge directed his lawyer to confirm whether he would be giving evidence by 30 January 2015.” Cut to the chase, have you or your lawyer confirmed to the judge you would be giving evidence by 30 Jan, meaning have u set a date on paper to be cross-examined? If you haven’t, this means you are not ready to be cross-examined. To prove you have no qualms about being cross-examined, please set the date. Then you can say the Press Sec lied. Pronto the logic?

  22. Pingback: The Prime Minister’s Secretary can Sue Me for Saying She Lied about Me or Apologise Immediately | The Heart Truths
  23. Ko Tiam Wee Danny

    Ravi’s “Therefore, I won’t be filing…” was replying to the judge, not a reaction to Davinder, when the judge seeked clarifications if the affidavit filed on Oct14 to stand as aeic.
    Ravi had not change his position as seen when plaintiff asked if defendant be filling affidavit at the beginning.

  24. Wuj

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

    Don’t talk so much cock, if you’re ready to be cross-examined then just go ahead and do it. What’s the point in kao-pehing that you are ready to be cross-examined only to chicken out when you had to walk the talk….Good luck to keeping whatever shred of credibility that you have left

  25. President Teo En Ming, Federation of the Universe

    [YOUTUBE VIDEO] Launch of the Singapore Democratic Party Economic Policy Paper by Dr. Chee Soon Juan on 7 Feb 2015 Saturday

    Dear Citizens of the World,

    I have just completed uploading my video coverage of the presentation by Dr. Chee Soon Juan to Youtube at 6:25 PM SGT. Video rendering on my Intel Core i5 4430 desktop computer took a solid 4 hours for a 2 hr video. Youtube may take another 10 hours to process my video before it becomes online. Please wait patiently for my Youtube video. The presentation by Dr. Chee Soon Juan started at 2:00 PM SGT on 7 Feb 2015 Sat. I was late for the presentation by 45 minutes due to another important matter that I had taken up. I am very very sorry for being late.

    Filmed by Teo En Ming (Zhang Enming)
    Singapore Citizen
    8 Feb 2015 Sunday Singapore Time GMT+8 / UTC+8

    COPYRIGHT NOTICE:

    COPYRIGHT © 2015 TEO EN MING (ZHANG ENMING)
    SINGAPORE +65-9117-5902

  26. Pingback: CPF blogger Roy Ngerng went to Norway, gave a speech and repeated the libel he was sued for in S’pore | Mothership.SG

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s