The fallout from the Changi Airport Director Liew Mun Leong and Prati Liyani case continues, with details surfacing that have netizens up in arms over the maid’s treatment the past four years.
Some of the items that were used as evidence in the case included a frayed Prada bag, two fake watches, a pair of stained Gucci sunglasses, a broken Pioneer DVD player, and various items of women’s clothing. The maid said she either asked for these items when she had seen them discarded or found the items in the trash.
Parti Liyani was acquitted for stealing items worth $34,000 when the judge recognized that the theft case was filed to keep her from complaining about her employers.
What did the Liews say about the “stolen” items?
According to a previous report by Alvinology, the people Liyani allegedly stole from were Liew’s son, Karl Liew, and the latter’s wife, who owned most of the items that were included in the case previously.
The frayed Prada bag was allegedly still used by Heather Lin, Karl Liew’s wife, whenever she went to the gym. According to a report by The Straits Times, the stained Gucci sunglasses were also not discarded but were actually just a casualty of “rubbing” in Lin’s handbag. The judge in the case rejected these claims, and said the condition of the items looked like they were refuse.
The same report said that Liew Mun Leong’s wife had thrown out a Pioneer DVD Player and that Liyani asked to take it home to Indonesia to repair in 2013. Liew’s wife, however, said that she did not throw out the device. A demonstration in court, however, showed that while you could still play media that was on the hard drive, the disc function of the device no longer worked.
Included in the evidence were two fake watches, a Swatch and a fake Vacheron Constantin. Two broken iPhone 4s were also part of the items examined in court.
46-year-old Prati was acquitted when the judge decided that the Liews had filed the case of theft against her after she threatened to complain to the Ministry of Manpower. The Liews used the theft case to prevent her from filing a complaint for the family using her to clean the younger Liew’s house when she was only contracted to work for the elder couple.
Two wallets and various items of women’s clothing were removed from the theft claims as there was insufficient evidence to say that these belonged to Karl Liew, as these were women’s items.
Temasek implores public to consider Liew’s contribution to economy
Following the comments left on Changi Airport’s Facebook page, Temasek has issued a statement that Liew’s contribution to the economy should be considered in light of the public backlash.
A report from The Straits Times stated that, Temasek International chief executive Dilhan Pillay Sandrasegara said “There are many individuals who have contributed to both public service and to the private sector in Singapore for the benefit of Singapore and our population as a whole. (Mr Liew) is one of those persons, and his track record at CapitaLand, at Changi Airport Group, and at Surbana Jurong attest to that.”
Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam has also advised the public not to conduct a “witch hunt” in relation to the case.
Mr Lee may have contributed to our economic success but he’s well paid for. He proclaims himself as a leader. Then he jolly well understands that a police report filed by a man of his standing would surely tilt the odds against the person he accused of theft.
The fact that the trial judge tried her hardest to help the prosecution find the accused guilty as charged…..accepting all the evidence produced by the prosecution and the testimonies of the plaintiffs at face value attested to the one sided match in open court.
One wonders what might have happened to the domestic helper of nine years working for this elite family had not Home and Mr Anil stepped in to help. What about her poor family back home ?
Are the rich and privileged in Singapore so comfy that they can afford to disregard their moral compass and lightly say that anything the police can investigate ? If guilty then go to he’ll. If not …well lucky you. No sorry whatever !!!
What did this guy contribute other than drawing salaries from multiple companies as a board of director? Are you saying all those white collar and blue collar workers contributed less to singapore because they dont draw as much salary as this guy? This high flyer rich man took advantage of the weak and Temasek ask us to forgive him because he was board of directors for multiple companies, what a joke! He should be given a harsher sentence not just a warning letter for Ministry of Manpower.