SINGAPORE — Eleven hours passed between the time Ms Cecilia Sue was taken to the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) and when she was first interviewed, and she only signed her fifth CPIB statement four hours after recording of her statement ended.

Meanwhile, midway through former Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) Director Ng Boon Gay’s graft investigation, the Deputy Director of the CPIB’s investigation department Teng Khee Fatt stopped recording details of the investigation into his station diary.

As these details were revealed on the seventh day of Ng’s graft trial by Mr Teng, a prosecution witness, defence lawyer Senior Counsel Tan Chee Meng called into question the CPIB’s handling of the investigation, and pressed Mr Teng on why there was a distinct shift in Ms Sue’s statements.

In her first four statements, Ms Sue maintained that she was having a consensual sexual relationship with Ng. This changed from the fifth statement onwards.

Ms Sue had been “so sure that the first three statements were so true that she volunteered for a polygraph test”, said Mr Tan, at one point noting an entry in the investigation diary which stated that Ms Sue was willing to take the test.

Mr Teng responded that there was a mistake in the investigation diary. “I left out the ‘not’,” he said.

Mr Teng also said that, after the recording of the fifth statement, Ms Sue initially expressed concern that her testimony would affect her marriage. According to Mr Teng, Ms Sue was then brought to his office by a senior investigator. “She wanted to save her marriage,” he said.

Mr Tan’s cross-examination prompted objections from District Judge Siva Shanmugam and the prosecution, with Mr Siva questioning the relevance in casting doubt on the CPIB’s investigation. But Mr Tan persisted, pointing out that it would be “an embarrassment to CPIB” if there were no charges after investigations, earning him a second rebuke.

Mr Tan said he was not casting doubt on the integrity of the CPIB, but he maintained his allegations against Mr Teng, who he said seemed to be “taking the matter personally, with (a view to) seeking a conviction”.

Mr Teng had allegedly told Ms Sue that her husband and employer would forgive her after her first statement recording ended, which Mr Teng yesterday explained was “just my personal opinion”.

Mr Teng also allegedly told Ms Sue that the CPIB would attempt to have the case heard in chambers. Asked if there was any precedent, Mr Teng said there had been a case “involving a sensitive operation”, but it did not involve a top civil servant.

On why he stopped filing the investigation details into his station diary — despite the law mandating police officers to do so — Mr Teng said it was because the investigation was assigned to a senior investigator. He could not explain the 11-hour gap before Ms Sue’s first interview.

Earlier, Mr Koh Hong Eng, a Senior Director (Global Lead) for Justice and Public Safety at Oracle Corporation, also took the stand.

While Deputy Chief Prosecutor Tan Ken Hwee sought to establish that there were business opportunities being pursued with the CNB by Ms Sue, Mr Koh acknowledged under cross-examination that he was not aware of any attempts at influencing the award of tenders by either Ms Sue or Ng.

Two other prosecution witnesses, CPIB officers Wilson Khoo and Bay Chun How, will take the stand before the prosecution wraps up its case.

The trial continues.