🚀 go-pugleaf

1.0    GLOBAL APPEAL AGAINST HUMAN OPPRESSION IN                          
SINGAPORE

1.1    This is a humanitarian appeal to conscientious people of the
international internet community to witness a global protest,  lodged by a
citizen of Singapore,  against the obstruction of justice by a corrupt and
oppressive government.  In order to protect their felonious relatives from
the punishment of the law,  the elected government has chosen  to obstruct
justice by committing crimes against the people whom they had sworn to
serve and to protect.    This global appeal is necessary as there is
presently no independent avenue left within Singapore to protect the common
people abused by this unjust government and by some of their degenerated
relatives.   

1.2    As a husband and as a human being,  I had tried to seek justice for
my wife whose organs were secretly removed by a vicious and deceitful
surgeon.    Dr. Gordon Tan Wee Teck of Joy Clinic of Women (Gleneagles
Medical Centre) is a relative to Mr. Lee Kuan Yew,  the founder of the
People's Action Party ("PAP"),  who dominated our Parliament for more than
35 years.
Despite our voluminous evidence,  medical and legal experts' opinions
proving his crimes,  my wife was denied justice by the government.   To try
to destroy my wife from continuing her struggle to claim her moral right to
seek justice from this cowardly criminal who had secretly  removed her
organs,   domestic harassment and sabotage techniques were used.  When she
endured and overcome these barricades,  death threats were delivered by
their lawyer and doctor from Lee Kuan Yew and his family.  

1.3   Our pleads as citizens for protection and justice to the President of
Singapore, Chief Justice,  Attorney General's Chambers,  Commissioner of
Police and to other Ministers were ignored.  The Prime Minister even
unabashedly tried to declare our case as closed even when confronted with
our documented evidence that several members of his senior staff had
committed criminal acts against the public. When I tried to make a police
report and to request for protection for my wife,  my request was dismissed
without any reasonable investigation.  The Singapore Police Force even
smugly threatened that if I should continue this complaint,  a police
Warrant of Arrest will be issued against my wife whom they know to be
suffering from certified major depression. The local media has also
obediently turned a very deaf ear to our repeated outcries of social and
legal discrimination by the Government.


2.0    THE NEED FOR A CYBERSPACE WRIT OF SUMMONS

2.1    For five years,  as a law abiding citizen,  I have tried to seek
justice by respectfully going through the whole length of our structured
law and order system.    In the end,  with despair and disbelief,  I found
that there is actually no real law and order to protect the common people
abused by these above-the-law individuals.   Judging from our case,  the
PAP and their relatives can freely commit almost any crimes in Singapore as
they are above their law. 

2.2    When their violent threats and domestic harassment failed to stop
our search for justice,  the PAP adopted their usual covering-up tactic of
completely ignoring our protests to the extend of ignoring even our legal
existence.  In June last year,  the Prime Minister simply declared our case
as closed.  Since then,  even those unethical lawyers and doctors who had
deliberately tried to destroy my wife's High Court case and evidence
against this doctor,  have also kept obediently silence despite my mass
newsletter circulation of their documented crimes against their own clients
to their peers, their respective professional societies,  etc.   

2.3    The public response from these mass mailing exercises indicated that
they are not only fearful of their elected servants,  but are mentally
terrorized by them as well.  Many conscientious citizens wrote and came to
us anonymously to comfort and encourage us to continue our struggle against
these elected criminals.   However,  they claimed that they know that the
PAP will also take actions against them for simply contacting us and could
not risk revealing their real identities.  

2.4    I understand that there are many royal citizens of my country that
do not want this reign of terror to continue to destroy the moral future of
Singapore.   It is a sad fact that presently the PAP have total control
over the civil authorities, the judicial and media.  There seem to be
little that the public could do to try to redress this problem.   

2.5    Through this cyberspace protest,  I hope to rekindle the spirit of
self pride and human dignities among all conscientious Singaporeans.  My
simple message to all who are abused by any unjust government in any
country,  or going to be abused,  is to stand up and fight for your god
given right to exist equally as human beings.   Fight,  if not to win,  at
least to retain our human dignities.  Locally,  the PAP and their many
willing agents can take away your homes and all our wealth,  and even put
us in jail.  But no one can take away our dignities but our selves. 

2.6    The PAP seem only responsive to communication serve to them in the
form of Writ of Summons,  as they frequently use their court system to
destroy anyone who dared to stand up to their brand of one-sided false
democracy.   Therefore,  my protest is a cyberspace Writ of Summons
together with a Statement of Claims narrating their crimes,  naming some of
the accused principal Defendants.  This is a symbolic protest.  Sadly,  our
local system of justice has a huge deliberate blindness when dealing with
complaints against the elected servants' infringement of the basic human
and constitution rights of the common people. 

2.7    All the events listed are documented and I have even circulated
copies of my Statutory Declaration to various departments in the PAP
government.   Therefore,  I could be jailed should any of these events be
inaccurate.   To date,  despite my mass circulation protesting of such
crimes against the people to the President of Singapore,  Ministers,  Chief
Justice,  judges,  MP,  police stations,  media,  Law Society, Medical
Council of Singapore,  etc -  they have chosen collectively not to
response; not to rebut nor try to sue me for defaming them.  In other
words,  to treat me as a non-existing citizen in the hope that their
victims will eventually be discouraged and give up their struggles for
justice.   But they cannot run away from their duties and they must now
face up to their committed crimes.

I ask the global internet community to read my cause with an open mind.  I
plead that you will accept the appointment of a PROCESS SERVER  to serve
this Cyberspace Writ of Summons together with a Statement of Claims,  by
re-posting the entire message to Mr. Lee Kuan Yew at 
l...@gov.sg

Perhaps with cyberspace world attention on the PAP government,  they might
be persuaded to consider re-accepting their sacred duties to uphold justice
equally for all and to apply the law on themselves as well as on any of
their relatives who had committed crimes against the innocents.  
Therefore,  to generate world attention,  and in the event that I will be
obstructed from posting this message again,  I would also appreciate if you
could also consider re-posting my entire message to any relevant newsgroups
in your country and to our local  "soc.culture.singapore".

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
Written & Petitioned by :   CHIA Chee Kong.  National Registration Identity
Card no. 1114390 C
Blk. 112 Yishun Ring Road # 13 � 415,  Singapore  760112.  Republic of
Singapore.
e-mail address :  ckc...@pacific.net.sg
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------


========================================================

CYBERSPACE WRIT OF SUMMONS

IN THE INDEPENDENT HIGH CONSCIOUS COURT OF THE INTERNATIONAL INTERNET
COMMUNITY


Between Madam. Lim Sue Kheng  ����. Plaintiffs

And

Mr. Lee Kuan Yew		 �����  # 1 Defendant 					
(Senior Minister)

Dr. Gordon Tan Wee Teck          �����. # 2  Defendant
(Gynaecologist)

Dr. Kwa Soon Bee                       �����. # 3  Defendant
(ex-Permanent Secretary of Health)

Dr. Lean Tye Hin                        �����.. # 4  Defendant
(Gynaecologist)

Mr. R. Palakrishnan                    �����.. # 5  Defendant   			
(Lawyer & Council Member of 
The law Society of Singapore)
		

THIS WRIT OF SUMMONS has been issued against you by the abovenamed
Plaintiff in respect of the claim endorsed herein.


Dated this :  21 February 1997


Chia Chee Kong
����������..		

Advocate for the Plaintiff


________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS  (written in a narrative form by a defiant lay person)


This is a TRUE story of human oppression,  social discrimination and the
wanton destruction of innocent lives.   This tale is about my wife's
stubborn refusal to accept the wishes of our unjust and immoral legal
system which tried destroy her for daring to ask for her moral right to
find out who had secretly removed her organs. 

During her struggle, we saw that not only were the common people mentally
terrorized by the PAP,  even the legal and medical  professionals have
either traded in their moralities to win political favours or that they are
afraid of standing up against such injustice because they fear that the PAP
might destroy their wealth and professional careers. 


THE HORROR BEGININGS
________________________________________________
When my wife approached Messrs. Drew & Napier,  a local legal firm,  she
was strangely assigned a very inexperienced lawyer for her medical
negligence case.  This firm advised my wife to sue Dr. Gordon Tan Wee Teck
of Joy Clinic for Women.  Before agreeing,  we asked and obtained in
writing that there was no conflict of interest for this firm to represent
my wife against a relative of Lee Kuan Yew.  We were also advised that the
final draft of the Statement of Claims was approved by the young lawyer's
team leader.   However,  immediately after filing the High Court Writ, 
suit no. 195 of 1994,  this lawyer when challenged by the Defendant's
lawyer could not justified most of his own allegations in his filed
statement of claims.  Another independent legal firm advised us that for
some strange reason,  Drew & Napier's legal advice and their filed
Statement of Claims were very negligent written and had tried to render my
wife's case with little or no chance of winning in court.  The most glaring
error was that Drew & Napier had advised their client to file a
professional negligence claims without first obtaining an independent
medical expert's opinion to identify exactly where were the wrong acts of
professional negligence.   

When I finally get an appointment to meet his team leader to discuss about
the problems in the statement,  to my surprise,  his team leader was
Davinder Singh,  a PAP member and a Member of Parliament.   During the
meeting,  Davinder allegedly claimed that although he was the team leader
of my wife's case,  he had not approved or even read my wife's Statement of
Claims.  This is contrary to his firm's previous advice.   He demanded that
he wanted his firm to terminate their service immediately despite the fact
that their client was placed into serious problems by this firm's
irresponsible and dishonest service.  Davinder was persistent that it was
pointless to discuss any further about his conflict of interest or of
professional negligence of his firm. Smugly he claimed that he could give
to us the names of at least 25 legal firms to amend their statement of
claims.  He purposely omitted to advice his client why it was necessary to
amend and that there was a short time limitation period on my wife to
amendment his statement of claims.  His firm rapidly discharged themselves
and abandoned my wife without legal representation in the High Court. 
Domestic harassment started.  Death birds and rubbish were deposited
outside the door of our flat;  and mysterious men sat patiently in the cars
facing our flat in the car park.   We had to find safer accommodation by
secretly moving out of our flat.

Meanwhile,  we approached many lawyers to try to amend the filed statement
of claims.  Many claimed that the damaged done by Davinder's team were
serious and my wife's case against Gordon was now almost destroyed by these
lawyers.  Mr. Ramanathan Palakrishnan ("Pala") of Palakrishnan and
Partners,  a lawyer and a senior council member of the Law Society of
Singapore,  advised us that he needed more evidence in order to help my
wife amend Davinder's Statement of Claims.  Pala arranged an exploratory
operation together with his referred medical expert, Dr. Lean Tye Hin of
Clinic 33 at UOL Building.  Palakrishnan claimed that without further
evidence,  no lawyer could take over this job to amend the damages done by
Messrs. Drew & Napier.

It was near midnight on the 7th of July 1994 when finally two surgical
attendants nonchalantly wheeled my semi-conscious, underweight wife out of
the surgical theatre in Thomson Medical Centre. I have been waiting
anxiously for more than seven hours in her cold empty ward.  This is not a
new experience for me as my wife had already undergone two other painful
operations by a Dr. Gordon Tan Wee Teck of Joy Clinic for Women.   After
each operation, I watched helplessly as my wife vomited painfully from the
after-effects of the anaesthesia while holding onto her fresh surgical
wounds.

So each time,   I had waited quietly and  prayed that my wife will be
returned to me once again,  unharmed and alive.  Again,  I wondered what
will my life be without her if something went wrong in this operation.

After Gordon's last operation in 1993,  although he reported in his medical
report  that my wife was completely healthy,   intact with a normal left
ovary and fallopian tube, she still suffered daily from excruciating
abdominal pains and discomfort.  But yet Gordon advised that there was
nothing wrong.   When she tried to consult other gynaecologists,  they
refused to treat her because they could not detect her alleged healthy left
ovary as stated in Gordon's medical report.  Furthermore,  she was also
suffering from various symptoms of premature menopause.   

For 13 months,  after Gordon Tan's operation,   She had to resort to
sleeping curling-up as it was too painfully to sleep in a straighten
position.  

But something must have gone wrong in this operation since it was
supposedly to be a short exploratory surgery�..  I noticed that there was a
tube flowing with dark brownish blood out of my wife's abdomen into a
sterile plastic bottle.

After about fifteen minutes, Dr. Lean came up to the ward.  He exclaimed
jubilantly of "ASTONISHING FINDINGS."   I watched and listened cautiously
to this man who once boasted to me that he had the mortal courage to
reprimand Lee KuanYew should he tried to protect his relative who had 
willfully caused criminal harm to another human being.  Gordon Tan is
married to Kwa Kim Li, a niece of Kwa Geok Choo who is better known as Mrs.
Lee Kuan Yew.  Gordon's wife who is a partner in Lee & Lee is also the
niece to Dr. Kwa Soon Bee, the Permanent Secretary of Health,  the brother
of Kwa Geok Choo.  Would Lean be really impartial in reporting his true
findings now ?

According to Lean, together with his operating surgeon, a Dr. Kee Swee Hae
of S H Kee Clinic for Women, that during their surgery,  they failed to
find any left ovary as falsely stated in the Surgical Report from Gordon
Tan.  Lean said that in his experience as a Professor of gynaecology, an
ovary will not just disappear but must be surgically removed.    He claimed
that they found that my wife left whole fallopian tube was healthy and
normal as stated in Gordon's report.  Lean advised that during the last
surgery about 13 months ago by Gordon Tan in his Balestier hospital,  there
were many fibroids already growing on my wife's uterus.  These muscular
growths, although non-cancerous,  must have caused severe abdominal pains, 
should have been removed by Gordon.  But yet for some reason,  this surgeon
did not even report his important finding in his report.


THE GREAT COVER UP BEGINS
__________________________________________________

Switching to a nervous tone,  Lean told me that he had instructed Kee, one
of his former student,  to surgically removed all my wife's remaining
reproductive organs.   He said that although Kee  was reluctant,  he did as
instructed.  When the nurse gave to Lean copies of Kee's surgical report,
he now refused to give to me this report as previously  agreed before the
surgery.     

Amazingly,   Lean insisted vehemently that I agree to adopt an unborn baby
boy from one of his patient. He asked for $ 15,000 in exchange for this
unborn human life.  Politely,  I rejected his offer by pointing out that
this was not the time to make such life long commitment.   But his actions
has aroused my instinct to doubt his credibility.   I also begun to
question whether his unexpected offer was made to compensate for his guilty
conscience.   If so,  what is he guilty of ?     

Did he ordered the complete hysterectomy to completely removed all existing
evidence to cover up for Gordon ? 

Several weeks later,  after finally able to examine a copy of Dr. Kee's
alleged surgical report, it is evident that he had tried to avoid reporting
that the removed left fallopian tube was only 5 cm - or 50% shorter
comparing with a normal one.  The pathologist who examined my wife's
specimens had also for many months deliberately avoided our queries
regarding the abnormal length of the left fallopian tube.   When personally
served with a Notice on 9 October 1994 of  impending legal action against
her and her firm,  Dr. Lim-Tan Soo Kim of Heal Laboratory finally admitted
in her telephone conversation the next day with Mr. David Nayar,  a lawyer
employed by Palakrishnan,  that  the left fallopian tube was indeed
shortened.  She advised that the outer funnel shaped portion of the removed
left fallopian tube was missing.  Therefore  it was not purportedly normal
as reported by Gordon-Lean-Kee.   As if divinely arranged,  I was sitting
in front of David when she called.  From their conversation,  I suspect
that she must have also informed Lean about her decision to come clean. 
She kept asking David as to whether  we are also taking legal actions
against Lean and Kee as well.


WHY DID THIS DR. GORDON TAN WEE TECK SECRETLY REMOVED THE LEFT OVARY AND
PORTION OF THE LEFT FALLOPIAN TUBE ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------
>From the various surgical,  diagnostic, pathological, Gordon's Patient Case
Notes, Hospital   Surgical Consent Form, Balestier Hospital Reports; 
documented expert's legal and medical opinions, etc.  the truth is
revealed. 

On the18 of September 1990,  Gordon using his ultrasound machine wrongly
diagnosed that my wife had a left endometriotic (blood) cyst growing on her
left ovary.  He prescribed an aggressive drug treatment which caused sever
side effects which made her incapable of maintaining her job in an auditing
firm.  After about seven months,  despite my wife complained of the
persistent pain in her left abdominal side,  Gordon pronounced that she was
completely cured.  According to Dr. Lean's verbal opinion given to two
lawyers on the 5th October 1994,    Gordon was untrained and unqualified at
the material time to use and to diagnose ultrasound scans.  He had made a
mistake in not properly determining that the ovarian cyst was treatable by
medication.  According to Dr. Lean,  there are many kind of ovarian cysts
and only a small blood cyst was treatable by medicine.  The rest can only
be surgically removed.

Less than a year later,  in June 1992 my wife again returned to Gordon
complaining of severe left abdominal pain.  After his ultrasound scan, 
this doctor advised us that the right ovary and the right fallopian tube
were healthy and normal.  But the same left ovarian blood cyst has
re-grown.   This time,  Gordon advised surgery at Balestier Medical Centre.
 

During the surgery,  Gordon physically saw that his diagnosed left
endometriotic cyst was wrong.  It was a mucinous cyst which is not
treatable by his 1990 medical prescription.   In order to avoid admitting
to his patient for causing her to suffer unnecessarily for 18 months and
for the lost of her good job,  Gordon simply decided to cover-up his 1990
and 1992 mistakes.

During the operation,  he quickly removed my wife's left ovary together
with the mucinous cyst and portion of her attached left fallopian tube. 
Immediately after his operation,  he changed all the post surgical records
to indicate that he had removed instead the right ovary and portion of the
right fallopian tube.  Not the left organs.   

He advised the patient that she was mistaken that before his operation, 
she complained of pains in her right pelvic side � not the left.  Gordon
reassured us that the 1990 left ovarian cyst had dried up and disappear
completely.  In his 1992 operation,  he removed a completely new right
mucinous cyst.

Gordon's lies could have been successful if not for divine intervention. 
Less than a year later,  in May 1993,  another gynaecologist examined my
wife and discovered that a small cyst was growing in her right ovary.  
This new doctor could not detect my wife's left ovary.  She refused to
treat my wife for a cystic right ovary as this contradicted with the
information given by Gordon.  She advised us to get Gordon's medical report
to confirm the mysterious details of his 1992 operation.  When we
approached Gordon again with this information,  he claimed that he could
not give us the reports as requested by the new gynaecologist.  He advised
us that my wife had cancer growing in the remains of her right fallopian
tube and insisted that she undergo another surgery urgently.   

According to Dr. Lean Tye Hin's opinion,  there was no indication of cancer
nor was the surgery necessary for such a small cyst.  However,  at the
time,  we had no choice as no other doctor could treat my wife without the
medical report from Gordon.  During his ultrasound scan, Gordon advised us
that my wife's left ovary and fallopian tube were normal and healthy.

In order to commit this premeditated crime against my wife in his second
surgery on the 20 May 1993,   he made use of his position as a substantial
shareholder in Balestier Hospital,    in order not to have any witness to
his premeditated crime against the patient � he arranged to operate without
a surgical assistant;  completed an alleged complicated surgery in less
than 30 minutes which normally require at least 2 hours (according to
documented medical expert's opinion),   and in his haste did not even
bothered to removed the uterine fibroids which he knew if untreated will
cause severe abdominal pains to his patient.  After his operation,  in
order not to be questioned by the husband,  he run away from the hospital
without checking on his operated patients.  He later abandoned and refused
further treatment to my wife.    In order to hide his hideous crime from
discovery by another gynaecologist,   he wrote a referral letter from
Balestier Hospital for my wife to seek better  gynaecological treatment
from one of his associate,  a Chinese sin-sen (medicine man).   According
to Dr. Lean, this type of irresponsible referral to an unqualified is a
striking off offence for all other medical practitioner in Singapore.  But
Gordon is not worried about the medical council due to his protection from
Dr. Kwa Soon Bee who is also the Registrar for the Medical Council of
Singapore.

The above particulars and events of Gordon's path of destruction can be
clearly traced and confirmed by medical and diagnostic reports from 1990 to
1994,  pathologist statements,  Surgical Consent Forms prior to the
operation,  Gordon's Patient Case Notes,  hospital reports,  specimen
photographs,  expert medical and legal opinions,  etc.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Logically,  I questioned why Lean and Kee tried to hide this vital evidence
from a judicial proceeding and now exposed themselves to possible criminal
punishment  as my wife's case is already lodged in the High Court, Suit no.
195 of 1994.   I turned this question of Lean's sabotaging my wife's High
Court case and his lack of personal integrity to Palakrishnan who referred
my wife to Lean.   There is total silence from this Senior Council Member
of the Law Society of Singapore.


DEATH THREATS FROM LEE KUAN YEW & FAMILY
_______________________________________________
On the 10 October 1994,  while I was engaged with some of Palakrishnan's
lawyers in their meeting room,  another one of his lawyer discreetly asked
my wife to go into his room at the other end of their office.  She walked
slowly and painfully into his room as she has not yet fully recovered from
her major surgery.  Mr. Sunil Gerald Emanuel boldly identified himself as a
personal "very good friend" of Gordan's wife.  

Sunil advised my wife not to pursue her case further otherwise Lee Kuan Yew
and his family will kill her and her husband,  and the government will give
us problems even if we migrate later.  Amazingly,  Sunil told my wife that
his own mother was also negligently "killed" by another doctor.   He cried
shamelessly and asked my wife to forgive Gordon.  He then asked to hold my
wife's hands to pray together with him to seek his Christian God's blessing
in her decision to forgive Gordon.  Even through my wife was unwell, she
could still see through this shameless blasphemy and hypocrisy.   She left
his room to inform me of this incredulous incident.  When I returned with
my wife, Sunil repeated, this time without the crocodile tears,   his
earlier threats from the Lee Family and informed us that we will not win
this case in the courts as the Lee's have decided to intervene to protect
Gordon.  He said that even Mr. Yong Pung How, the Chief Justice, owed his
position to Lee Kuan Yew and therefore the CJ will not interfere in their
decision to protect Gordon from being punished by the law.  He also claimed
that Mr. Goh Chok Tong,  the Prime Minister, does not have the courage to
confront the Lee's over this type of matters.   His parting warning is that
either we will be rich or very poor basing on our decision whether to
pursue this case.  When we came out of Sunil's room,  David Nayar had
arranged to disappear from the office.  My letter to Pala asking for
clarification of Sunil's conduct were ignored.


SETTLEMENTS IF NO ALLEGATIONS OF MISSING LEFT OVARY AND LEFT FALLOPIAN TUBE
__________________________________________________
After exposing Lean's cover-up of his 1994 finding, I noticed that all
Palakrishnan's lawyers now refused to meet with their own medical expert. 
Unconventionally,   on the 15 October 1994, I was requested by these
dishonest lawyers to attend another meeting in Lean's office alone to
discuss about the legal drafting for the Statement of Claims.   But this is
obviously a job for the lawyers.  Why would this legal firm used this lame
excuse to force their client to meet their own medical expert alone ?  Even
through the two young lawyers were sitting idly in their own offices, they
refused to attend this meeting and advised me that they do not need to meet
Dr. Lean anymore despite the fact that it is already proven that Lean has
premeditatedly planned to sabotage my wife's case even since their 1994
operation.

During the meeting on the 15 October,  Lean tried to destroy my wife's case
further by reversing most of his verbal opinions given to Palakrishnan's
lawyers on the 5 October 1994.  Since the draft of the Statement of Claims
was based primarily on his above opinions, the draft was now
unsubstantiated and structurally destroyed by his reversal.  The date line
for filing this court document is only two days away.  Lean advised that
Gordon will offer a settlement if we make no allegations against Gordon of
the missing left ovary and fallopian tube.  He shouted and screamed at me
to immediately instruct my wife's lawyers to amend all such pleadings in
the draft Statement of Claims.  

I asked him what is the point in suing if we are not allowed to make
substantiated allegations of Gordon's numerous criminal acts.   I tried to
amicably advised him that I will asked Palakrishnan to revert to him as I
want to leave such legal matter in the lawyers' hands.  Lean screamed and
repeatedly banged his clutched fists on his  enormous file scattered old
table.  He yelled that  I do not need legal advice on this matter as I am
the husband.  In an almost insane and desperate tone, he asked why do I
want to know what had actually happened to my own wife.   I watched him
silently as he proceeded to call me a "bastard" and other vulgar remarks. 
He advised me whether I know that "after the 1994 surgery,  there is no
evidence left for anyone to see".   Finally, he threw my wife's file across
the table at me.   I wondered who could have the power to influence this
grand old seventy-year old professor of medicine to make him  obstruct
justice in such a verbose gangster-like manner ?   His parting remark is
that if  I do not instruct the lawyers to immediately strike out the
allegations of the missing left ovary and left fallopian tube, etc.,   he
and Kee will not support this case in court,  nor will he produce any
written opinion to support the Statement of Claim. Now I understood why
Palakrishnan and his lawyers had arranged themselves to be absent from this
meeting with their referred medical expert.   On returning home, I
immediately record the above events and faxed Palakrishnan.

When I asked for an explanation from Palarkishnan,  again he kept a knowing
silence but now he tried to avoid meeting us.   But through his lawyers, 
we were informed that he wanted us to pay his legal charges in advance. 
During my final short abrupt 4-minute meeting with Palakrishnan two days
later (17 October 1994),  Palakrishnan could not even look at us in the
eyes.  While facing the book shelf,   he spoke to his law books and advised
them that Lean had allegedly confirmed to  him yesterday that he will write
his opinion and advised my wife to pay Lean for this service to write his
opinion.  His remark is highly questionable.   Palakrishnan had to lie
because by then we knew that no competent and honest lawyer could file a
Statement of Claims for professional negligence without first obtaining a
documented expert's opinion to accurately identify the various acts of
wrongful negligence.  Before I could ask for clarification,  he had already
shot out of his meeting room.  

We consulted several legal firms to get them to take over the case.  But
they all refused.  One senior lawyer even advised us that our only chance
left is to watch Palakrishnan carefully for his next move.  After six
months, as expected, Palakrishnan will not honour this professional promise
to produce Lean's written opinion.   But instead, through his lawyers, 
Palakrishnan instructed me to meet Lean personally again to try to obtain
his written opinion.  Despite my protest, they advised me that it was now
"imperative" for me to attend this meeting with Lean.  Through
Palakrishnan's lawyers,   he instructed us not to make any criminal reports
to the police or to go to the media with our story.


FURTHER ATTEMPT BY DISHONEST LAWYERS TO DESTROY HIGH COURT EVIDENCE
______________________________________________________
On the 31 March 1995, I discovered that Palakrishnan had without any
instruction or legitimate reason, instructed his lawyers to take out the
1994 specimen slides from the pathologist's office.  As his unauthorised
action could destroy or corrupt the evidence against Gordon,   I asked him
for an explanation to justify their action. They refused to commend and
kept the slides.  To date,  the whereabouts of these High Court evidence is
unknown. 



MEDICAL EXPERT'S LIFE ALSO THREATEN BY LEE KUAN YEW AND FAMILY
____________________________________________________________
During this meeting on the 22 April 1995,  Lean said that his life is also
now threatened by the Lee Kuan Yew and his family if he continue to support
my wife's case further.  He also advised that he did not informed
Palakrishnan or to any of his lawyers that he will write his opinion to
back their allegations made in the filed Statement of Claim.  In fact he
refused to perform this task despite receiving full payment from my wife to
write his opinion. Lean claimed that he need not proceed any further with
my wife's case because her lawyers have never ask him to write his opinion.
Therefore,  Palakrishnan had deliberately lied to his clients and conspired
with Lean to trick her into paying for their illusive services.   

Lean informed us that Palakrishnan could immediately discharge himself from
this case and if this happen than he (Lean) will also immediately wash his
hands from this case as well.   In order to prevent this from happening, 
he  wanted us to retract our complaint against Sunil Emanuel.  According to
Lean,  it was pointless for us to try to make a complaint to the Law
Society of Singapore against these lawyers as the Society is fearful of
exposing the Lee Kuan Yew's Family involvement in these matters.   Lean
warned my wife that if she should lose this case, "then all your husband
fortune will go".   When I asked Lean what exactly he wanted.   He said he
wanted my wife to give to him a "card blanc" or full authority to ask
Gordon for a settlement with all his previous conditions attached.  In his
haste, unwittingly he told us that Dr. Kwa Soon Bee now owes him several
favours for this settlement.  Lean then telephoned and spoke to
Palakrishnan .  They happily arranged to ask Sunil Gerald Emanuel to
approach Gordon for a settlement with full indemnity.  The next day, my
wife faxed him our rejection of their disgusting, lawless demand to
obstruct justice in our courts.


Futility of Seeking A Honest and Courageous Lawyer in Singapore 
____________________________________________________________
Once more, we rushed around the island in desperate search for a decent and
courageous lawyer.  We had approached numerous lawyers in more than 14
legal firms.   The story was almost always the same i.e. although we have a
cast iron case supported by full documentation proving the crimes committed
by Gordon,  no lawyer who valued their position in our legal system would
take on a case against a publicly declared protected relative of Lee Kuan
Yew. 

Another senior lawyer told my wife : "It is very difficult, you know", 
then shakes his wise head several times and sadly walked away from  her. 
The final lawyer, whom we had labeled as a "licensed bandit" agreed to take
on my wife's case and asked for $ 10,000 as a deposit.  After writing three
short negligent letters,  quickly declared himself discharged and billed
her for $ 10,000 as his professional fee.  

Perhaps the sentiment among the local lawyers could be justly summed up by
the advice given to my wife by another Senior Council Member of the Law
Society of Singapore,  i.e. to leave Gordon to be eventually punished by
divine retribution.  My complaints to the Law Society of Singapore ended
with the same complacent but deliberate tactics to deny the lay people from
seeking justice and redress.   I feared that all lawyers had not only lost
faith in their legal system but have also purposely devoid themselves of
self pride, ethics and a human conscience.

MEDICAL COUNCIL OF SINGAPORE
".......the watchdog for(not over) the Medical Profession" � Straits Times.
 2nd Dec. 1993
Mr. Emanuel correctly predicted on the 10th October 1994 that the
Preliminary Proceedings Committee ("PPC") of the Singapore Medical Council
will dismiss our complaint against Gordon.   Even Lean had told us that Dr.
Kwa Soon Bee will make use of his position as the Registrar in the Council
to dismiss our complaint to the PPC.  But to reach their deceitful object,
the PPC had to go against all their medical code of ethics and the
established  medical procedure in order to cover up the deplorable acts
committed by this delinquent doctor.  Despite our previous lawyers' notice
to them that Gordon had submitted false documentation in his defense, the
PPC  prevented us from filling in new evidence to expose these forgeries. 
Using such tactics, the PPC must have during the decades dismissed many
similar genuine complaints against dangerous doctors who preyed mercilessly
on their helpless patients. 


THE  PAP COVER-UP
_____________________________________________________________
In desperation, I wrote to the Chief Justice,  Mr. Yong Pung How but was
advised that this supposedly supreme guardian of all justice in Singapore
does not want to get involved in this matter where his name was used to
obstruct justice in the High Court of Singapore.

I also wrote to Lee Kuan Yew enclosing my statutory declaration describing
how Sunil Gerald Emanuel had advised us on the 10th October 1994 that
Senior Minister wanted to protect his relative from criminal punishment and
that death threats from the Lee Family were relayed to us through this
lawyer.  Unconventionally,   this fiery man who had destroyed all who dared
to oppose him regardless of their causes, now refused to comment on this
matter.   His  silence indicated that he did not need to clarify any
possible misunderstanding regarding his intention to protect Gordon from
the law,  and about their death threats.

Similar letters to the President of Singapore, the Ministers of Law, Health
had also landed on deaf ears.  I wondered had the Health Minister who once
preached "that people should not be treated like pieces of meat"  had also
been told to turn a very blind eye to the mismanagement and corruption
within the civil services under his million-dollar-a-year salary preview ?

An astonishing exceptions to this PAP wall of silence tactic was the Prime
Minister,   Goh Chok Tong.   His office reply to my repeated letters said
the PM understood my feeling but advised me to forget about the past and
think instead of my future.  Was this a subtle threat of impending doom for
any citizen who dared to opposed the willful gale of the PAP ?

I often wondered how can a Prime Minister of any country lead his people
forward when he has no courage and integrity to break the dominating habits
of the past ?   How can a honest person publicly preach of his able
leadership in an alleged fair & equitable society when he himself dare not
and/or will not uphold justice for all ?              


USING THEIR LAW TO TRY TO MUZZLE THE TRUTH
__________________________________________________
Expensive lawyers representing Balestier hospital and the government had
initially served notices warning me of impending legal actions if I
continue to publish the truth to any third party.  Despite my replies to
continue publishing and even sending several of my newsletters to their law
firms and to their clients' offices,   they still dare not sue yet.   Like
many bullies � they are mere cowards when confronted.  I also believe that
it must be difficult for these lawyers to produce a believable Statement of
Claim which could distort most of the documented evidence against the
government and their relatives.  


THE POLICE'S SUNDAY PLAN
___________________________________________________
The police were waiting for me to file my complaint and to request for
police protection for my wife in Tanglin Police Station in February 1996. 
Without needing to check my identity card or verifying my identity, the
officers allowed me to file my police report.  But they repeatedly refused
to accept any of my evidence supporting my allegations of various criminal
acts.  During their seven-month delay period,  I received a letter from the
police dismissing my request for police protection.  However,  in their
haste to cover-up this request and to reach their dishonest decision,  they
did not even bothered to check my identity;  ask for any of my evidence;  
interview me or take my statement.   

Either the Singapore Police force is using a very inaccurate fortune teller
to conduct their investigation or they are extremely dishonest in
discharging their salaried duties to protect the public.   At the end of
the seven month period,  I was instructed to sign a series of their
specially prepared statements; each signing must be done on different days
and assess denied to the previously signed statements.  To my surprise, 
the police also tried to deny my right to fill assault charges against
Gordon Tan.   DSP Henry Soh, the same officer who was selected to handle
the Christopher Lingle's case and other politically sensitive cases, said
that he preferred that I come to his station only on Sundays as there will
be less police personnel around.   Amazingly, I learnt that without
checking my identity and before I have the chance to read and sign their
specially prepared statements,  Henry advised that he had already
"interviewed" the accused.   

I was also informed that Sunil Gerald Emanuel could not now be contacted as
he had already left for the United Kingdom.   I wondered whether this was
one of their reasons for the 7 month delay.  Henry smugly threatened me
that if I should continue with this report, a police warrant of arrest will
be issued against my wife whom he knew to be suffering from certified major
depression.  From the numerous photographs displayed in his office
depicting Henry proudly receiving important awards from the PAP members, 
he clearly had worked very hard to earn their trust and affection. 

                   
The End ?
_________________________________________________

Our hope of finding equal justice in my country ended long ago.   

We are glad that we did not trade in our souls to these immoral criminals
and their many shameless conspirators.   

With fear and despair,  I could only glimpse into the future of my
Singapore.


_________________________________________________________

Kindly consider re-posting this entire message to any relevant news groups
in your country, to "soc.culture.singapore" and to l...@gov.sg