Tensions Rise as Pritam Singh Faces Prosecution's Cross-Examination

The Setting of the Trial On the second day of cross-examination, Deputy Attorney-General Ang Cheng Hock scrutinized Singh's previous statements to the COP, asserting that Singh had created a "misleading impression." The trial's proceedings stem from allegations that Singh lied about his interactions with Raeesah Khan, a fellow WP MP, regarding her false statements made in Parliament about accompanying a rape victim to a police station. As the trial unfolds, the stakes are high not only for Singh but also for the reputation of the Workers' Party. Key Moments in Cross-Examination The cross-examination was marked by a rapid-fire exchange, with Mr. Ang pressing Singh on contradictions between his court testimony and previous statements to the COP. For instance, Singh's assertion that he had advised Khan to clarify her statements was questioned when Ang cited discrepancies in Singh's own accounts. This led to a significant moment where Singh was asked directly whether he held himself out as an honest person, to which he affirmed, "Yes, I would." Misleading Impressions and WhatsApp Exchanges A pivotal part of the prosecution's argument revolved around a clarification statement drafted by Singh for Khan, which she later modified. Mr. Ang pointed out that Singh had previously stated in the COP that Khan did not check with him before making her parliamentary statement. However, evidence from a WhatsApp exchange indicated that Khan had informed Singh about her proposed edits, casting doubt on Singh's claims. Ang suggested that Singh's narrative aimed to mislead the COP, to which Singh responded, asserting that he had provided the relevant WhatsApp exchanges to the committee.

Contradictions and Accountability As the cross-examination progressed, the prosecution highlighted further contradictions in Singh's testimony regarding what he communicated to Khan about her need to clarify her statements. Singh maintained that he had told Khan she needed to clarify her position, regardless of whether the matter was raised that day. However, Mr. Ang challenged this by presenting Singh's previous statements that suggested otherwise, leading to a critical examination of Singh's credibility.