STOMP it anytime, anywhere.
Download the new STOMP app today.
The Straits Times
Feb 10, 2023
Karl Liew Kai Lung, who is accused of giving false evidence in the case of his family’s former maid, Ms Parti Liyani, is expected to admit to his charges on March 30.
The 45-year-old man, who is the son of former Changi Airport Group chairman Liew Mun Leong, was charged in 2020 with giving false evidence and furnishing false information to a public servant.
He is alleged to have falsely told the police in 2016 that he had found 119 items of clothing belonging to him in boxes that had been packed by Ms Parti, who was then accused of stealing from the family employing her.
He also allegedly gave false evidence during Ms Parti’s trial that a T-shirt and a blouse, which were exhibits in the case, had belonged to him.
Ms Parti, an Indonesian, was initially convicted in 2019 of stealing $34,000 worth of items from the Liews but was acquitted after the High Court overturned her conviction on appeal in 2020.
Ms Parti, who began working for the Liew family in 2007, was asked in March 2016 to do chores at Karl Liew’s home and clean his office in another location.
She had expressed unhappiness at being made to do extra work for him.
The Liew family terminated her employment in October 2016, and she was given two hours to pack her belongings into three boxes.
Unhappy, Ms Parti threatened to lodge a complaint with the Ministry of Manpower before returning to Indonesia.
She had asked Karl Liew to pay for the boxes to be shipped to her. The next day, the Liew family opened the boxes belonging to Ms Parti.
A police report was later made, alleging that some of the items she had packed in the boxes belonged to the Liew family.
Ms Parti was arrested when she returned to Singapore in December 2016, and was charged with four counts of theft in August 2017.
She claimed trial to the charges. She was then convicted and sentenced to two years and two months’ jail in 2019.
Ms Parti was acquitted after an appeal in 2020, in which the High Court ruled the original conviction was “unsafe”, highlighting the police’s handling of the evidence.