Shane Todd verdict ‘clear’: K Shanmugam

SINGAPORE — Law Minister K Shanmugam has said that the verdict in the Shane Todd case is “clear”, adding that based on the key evidence by the pathologists which include the 2 experts from the United States and in Singapore it was suicide without a doubt and that he had hung himself.

State Coroner Chay Yuen Fatt ruled today that American researcher Todd’s death was suicide by hanging himself and no foul play was involved in his death.

Todd, 31, was found hanged in his apartment in Chinatown on June 24 last year. His parents, Rick and Mary Todd, believe he was murdered over sensitive research work done at the Institute of Microelectronics (IME), where he was employed.

Mr Shanmugam said the Todds had walked out of the inquiry just before they were due to give evidence and had trumped up the fact that they had never met Mr Luis Alejandro Andro Montes — who is said to have seen Todd the day before he was found hanged — was as “an excuse for not testifying”.

Mr Shanmugam also called on The Financial Times to do the “honorable” thing by correcting the article published regarding Mr Todd, saying that Mr Raymond Bonner, who wrote the article, did not verify the facts.

When asked if the government will sue The Financial Times if it does not correct the inaccuracies in the article, Minister said:” I don’t think that’s a path we want to go down.”

Mr Shanmugam, who is also Minister for Foreign Affairs, says that he does not see how US-Singapore relations will be affected, adding that the statement from the US embassy also said the inquiry was clear and fair.

The process was also done in the full glare of the open trial process, Mr Shanmugam said.

When asked to comment on the Todd family intending to bring the case to the attention of US President Barack Obama, Mr Shanmugam said “the US authorities can see for themselves what we have done”.

On allegations that the Police’s standard operating procedures (SOP) mucked up evidence collection, Mr Shanmugam said that for the case, what the officers did was “acceptable in context” and that SOPs should not change just because people make certain allegations.