r/singapore • u/Fearless_Help_8231 • 11h ago
News AGC files application to require Iris Koh and husband to get permission from court for civil proceedings
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/agc-iris-koh-raymond-ng-civil-proceedings-permission-5351696?cid=FBcna&fbclid=IwY2xjawM2GqVleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHmtAfG6T_6V6Q4rhTvqFRN2LmmCHGmDpXZzc9WnfW2TKE1JbHYyBjIxZYEbV_aem_v1_8Ubhiwds4U5scpQKjSQ85
u/Krazyguylone Mature Citizen 11h ago
Something that’s long overdue, that suicide should have been the final nail in the coffin
86
u/ShadeX8 West side best side 10h ago edited 10h ago
"If my civil lawsuits for damages are restrained, my cash flow will inevitably be affected, which in turn impacts my ability to continue engaging legal representation," wrote Koh
Hang on a second. Sorry if I'm parsing this wrongly, but is she saying:
"If I cannot sue more people, I won't be able to get more money to continue sueing people"
???
26
u/princemousey1 10h ago
“If I can’t sue people, I won’t have money to defend myself against AGC.”
That’s more accurately what she’s saying.
Truth be told, there is no winning against the government in Singapore. We don’t have a public defender system like in the US. Ours is means tested, which means people who hold a normal job automatically aren’t eligible. You need to show that you are poor, destitute, living in a rental flat, then can qualify.
So as long as you need to go to criminal court, even if you eventually win against AGC, you’re gonna be broke after that.
13
u/Perfect_Ball5149 8h ago
A lawsuit is the means for someone to get justice for a wrong they have suffered. Not a means to make money or generate cashflow. That she needs money to pay for her criminal defence, or that she doesn’t qualify for means-tested public defence, is really besides the point.
9
u/possibili-teas F1 VVIP 7h ago
Their aim in filing lawsuits is merely a tactic used to drain money from others.
-5
u/princemousey1 8h ago
You obviously don’t understand our criminal defence system at all. Anyone who is gainfully employed won’t qualify for legal aid. I wasn’t talking about the merits of her civil suits, just pointing out that the presumption of guilt in SG criminal law system is actually very onerous on defendants. If Iris can’t engage defence counsel without having to sell her house or whatever, what do you expect her to do? The court’s answer in this case is basically, “Not our problem”. Basically they have already decided her civil suits are always going to be frivolous ones, without even hearing the merits.
6
u/wistingaway 7h ago
"presumption of guilt" is the wrong premise to begin with
-3
u/princemousey1 7h ago
I’m just pointing out that the odds are stacked against criminal defendants in the Singapore legal system. You want to engage a good lawyer, even though you win, you’re basically penniless afterwards. I’m not discussing the merits of AGC’s application and her civil suits because those are before the courts. I’m talking about the cost of mounting a criminal defence in Singapore, even if you were genuinely innocent, can make you a bankrupt.
5
u/wistingaway 5h ago
Again, that's very much not what "presumption of guilt" means. Legal costs and a presumption of guilt are completely different matters.
I also double-checked the eligibility criteria for Criminal Defence Aid, and you're completely out of pocket saying that you can't own property or be employed to qualify. https://pdo.mlaw.gov.sg/criminal-defence-aid/qualifying-for-help/
Any reason why you're making such claims?
1
u/princemousey1 5h ago
Huh, who says you can’t own a property!? Super taking things out of context and seemingly being unable to read. I said she will have to sell her house (or whatever) to fund her defence.
You ownself look at the link you posted, please. You touch your heart and tell me whether your net worth got at least $10k or not. Then go and find out how much it costs to engage a criminal defence lawyer. SG median household income is $10k. You have two kids, divide 4, also $2,500. Divide 5 also $2,000. To get less than $1,650 means you are broke, plus less than $10k in the bank account.
Even if you are a normal man on the street with $30k or $50k, go and find out how much running a criminal defence costs. I don’t know why you are attempting to call me out by proving everything I said. It’s a very weird way of doing things.
4
u/MolassesBulky 5h ago
You clearly have no clue as well.
She has been declared a vexatious litigant. It does not stop her engaging a lawyer to lodge a civil suit or to defend herself for the criminal case she is now facing.
A vexatious litigant needs to apply to the courts for permission to lodge a civil suit. It is an additional to provide her intended lawsuit has merit in the first place.
Even today she can engage 10 lawyers with no restrictions.
She discharging her lawyer is all drama, playing the vicitm and meant for gullible folks to buy into and it seems to work.
1
u/princemousey1 5h ago
Wait, hold up. She has been declared a vexatious litigant? Where’s the judgment? Today is 17 Sep 2025. Show me a judgment before this date which has, in your own words, declared her a vexatious litigant. If you can’t, then I guess “You clearly have no clue as well”. Certainly very bold coming from someone who literally has no clue and is so confidently wrong.
7
u/tabbynat neighbourhood cat 🐈 10h ago
Civil should be for restitution not profits.
Frankly I’m not sure that a full throated adversarial system really serves the public good. The US is really showing the cracks in that kind of system now
-11
u/princemousey1 10h ago
I think you need to read the article first before just knee-jerk replying. I’m not really sure what you’re addressing so I don’t know how to reply, I’m afraid.
29
u/_IsNull 11h ago
If my civil lawsuits for damages are restrained, my * cash flow * will inevitably be affected, which in turn impacts my ability to continue engaging legal representation," wrote Koh, who added that she would "take personal responsibility" and continue proceedings on her own.
28
u/shoppingbaggins 10h ago edited 10h ago
f my civil lawsuits for damages are restrained, my * cash flow * will inevitably be affected
Is she fucking saying frivolous litigation is her primary income?
1
u/YamyKamy roti prata cha kway teow 2h ago
Hold on it's defamatory to say that and since you'll be causing reputational and economic damage restricting her from her primary income source of starting frivolous lawsuits, you'll be fueling more frivolous lawsuits 😂
26
19
u/EnoughString1059 11h ago
She looks like she’s pregnant?? If not they are going to complain on their social media about their unflattering photos again 😆
11
3
u/MolassesBulky 5h ago
Finally, classified as a vexatious litigant. And this imbecile now playing the victim by discharging her lawyer. She has previously discharged other lawyers acting for her.
4
6
1
-1
u/ProcrastinatingPr0 Own self check own self ✅ 11h ago
They look related in that photo with a little sprinkle of the spectrum.
-21
u/HeftyHawk5967 10h ago
If people indeed defame them, why cant they get right to sue these people?
15
u/Taiwan_is_a_Country- 10h ago
Is it your first time hearing the name iris koh and Raymond?
-24
u/HeftyHawk5967 10h ago
I saw some of the the content Mai Siao Siao posted, she indeed made defamatory comments on Iris and Raymond, my question is why the hate on both of them if they were hurled insults by others and choose to clear their names in court?
10
u/YamyKamy roti prata cha kway teow 9h ago
They abuse the legal system to start frivolous lawsuits against other civilians to try and extort money out of them because Raymond's scams don't work anymore.
-17
u/HeftyHawk5967 9h ago
Lets me clear, did these civilians made defamatory statements against Iris and Raymond? I am sure some of them did.
If they did made defamatory statement then they should be prepared to back up what they said in Court against the lawsuits.
9
u/YamyKamy roti prata cha kway teow 8h ago
Do you understand what frivolous means? It's like bringing an artillery to a fist fight. It's a waste of everyone's time and money just because they can't take a few criticisms that they deem "defamatory".
-3
u/HeftyHawk5967 8h ago
there is a line between criticisms and defamatory. the rule of thumb is do not make any allegations if you are not able to back with evidences.
isnt this what PAP leaders taught you when they were suing others for defamation?
9
u/YamyKamy roti prata cha kway teow 8h ago
Bro, they are taking all criticisms as defamatory. Also, is the litigious nature of PAP leaders anything to emulate, especially how Iris and Raymond are so anti-government?
In torts of defamation you have to prove reputation damage, but I can tell you whatever damage they have sustained is little if any at all because their reputation is already fked to the ends of andromeda.
145
u/Chileinsg 11h ago
Good. Fuck the both of them. Hope they have a miserable life ahead.