Raeesah Khan grilled by Pritam Singh’s lawyer, called a ‘liar’ who tells ‘lies non-stop’

SINGAPORE: Pritam Singh’s defence on Tuesday (Oct 15) began their cross-examination of former Workers’ Party (WP) member Raeesah Khan, with his lawyer accusing her of repeatedly lying in parliament and to Singh himself.
Singh’s lawyer Andre Jumabhoy referred Ms Khan to her anecdote in parliament on Aug 3, 2021 and repeatedly called out moments to grill Ms Khan on whether she had been telling the truth.  
Ms Khan had lied in parliament twice in 2021 about accompanying a rape victim to a police station, where a police officer allegedly made comments about the woman’s attire and consumption of alcohol.
Her account led to a series of events which ultimately resulted in Ms Khan revealing the truth in parliament, and the matter was later referred to a Committee of Privileges (COP) inquiry. 
Singh, the 48-year-old secretary-general of WP, is accused of making two lies before the COP on Dec 10 and Dec 15, 2021 during events after Ms Khan’s anecdote. 
Mr Jumabhoy’s cross-examination of Ms Khan was fast-paced, with the lawyer putting questions to her in a rapid-fire manner. Ms Khan, who appeared composed and stoic, often answered “yes” or “no” to the volley of queries. 
Referring to Ms Khan’s anecdote that she made in parliament on Aug 3, 2021 , Mr Jumabhoy asked her: “You are in fact a liar, right?”, to which her reply was “yes I’ve lied”.
He then followed up with: “You tell lies non-stop, don’t you?”, but Ms Khan denied this. 
“I’m not talking (about) in your general life, I’m talking just in relation to the COP, the anecdote, these proceedings,” said Mr Jumabhoy. 
When asked to clarify what he meant by “non-stop”, Mr Jumabhoy referred to specific portions of the anecdote. For example, when Ms Khan had said she had accompanied women to police stations. 
After Ms Khan admitted that this statement was not true, Mr Jumabhoy said: “So that’s a lie, I mean that’s a flat-out lie … you can’t be in any doubt that you’ve never accompanied anyone to the police station.”
Ms Khan’s anecdote, which she stated that the alleged rape victim was 25, and that she had come out crying, were also not true, she admitted in court. 
Ms Khan had further lied to Singh in her messages with him after she delivered the anecdote in parliament, according to the defence.
When Singh had asked for more details in relation to the anecdote, Ms Khan had replied that she did not know if she could contact the survivor to come forward. 
Mr Jumabhoy then pointed out that Ms Khan did not even know the name of the rape victim. 
“You couldn’t share a name (even if you did know) because you weren’t there in the first place,” said Mr Jumabhoy. 
He then said: “You’re adding more facts to support a lie … So it’s a lie heaped upon a lie … and then it’s going to be wrapped up in more lies, isn’t it?”
Ms Khan replied “yes” to all these statements. 
The defence lawyer continued to point out details in Ms Khan’s messages, stating that in one message she had “managed to lie about four times”. 
“I mean, that’s pretty impressive by any stretch of the imagination,” he added. 
Ms Khan replied: “I wouldn’t call it impressive, I would call it fear.”
But Mr Jumabhoy rebutted: “You seem to be well thinking enough that you can add (these details).”
Ms Khan responded: “I would think being well thinking is to be coming out with the truth.”
Mr Jumabhoy then returned to Singh’s messages – the WP chief had asked Ms Khan which organisation had put her in touch with the victim. In her reply, Ms Khan had said she was trying to get more details. 
“You say ‘I’m trying to get more details’. The last thing you wanted was more details because that would expose the fact you lied,” Mr Jumabhoy said, to which Ms Khan responded “yes”. 
After a series of similar questions, Mr Jumabhoy repeated what Ms Khan had told the court about her respect for Singh during the prosecution’s questioning on Monday. 
“You’ve told this court that Mr Singh was somebody you looked up to. You revered him. Correct? He was a mentor to you. And he was someone you felt more than capable of just lying (to) outright, yes?”
Ms Khan replied “yes”, to which Mr Jumabhoy followed up with: “So that for you is how you treat somebody you revere?”
Ms Khan clarified: “No, but I mean I was really scared at that point and I revered him so much that I was so scared of disappointing him, I just let it snowball. And of course I mean I would never do something like that again, but yeah you’re right.”
When asked if she had lied only to Singh over the anecdote, Ms Khan said: “Because I made that speech in parliament, I lied to the whole country.” 
The cross-examination of Ms Khan will resume on Tuesday afternoon after the court’s lunch break.