Mr Ang also contended that Singh’s version of events in court contradicted what he had told the police about a meeting between him, Ms Loh and another of Ms Khan’s former aides Mr Yudhishthra Nathan.

He made the point that Singh had testified – repeatedly – that Ms Low and Ms Nathan were trying to suppress the truth.

“But in your statement to the police, you told the police that they were not trying to suppress the truth.”

This line of questioning revolves around what was said at a meeting between the trio on Oct 12, 2021. 

Mr Ang said Singh stated in his statement to police that Ms Loh and Mr Nathan were not trying to suppress Ms Khan’s lie, but rather how to articulate it in her personal statement.

Mr Ang noted that the pair, who took the stand as prosecution witnesses, have said in court that they thought if Ms Khan did not reveal her own sexual assault in her clarification to Parliament, it would be very difficult to explain why she lied.

He said: “That was their position, yes?”

Singh agreed.

When asked if he agreed with this position eventually, he said: “My view was that the statement was for Ms Khan to make, they can retain that view, for me it was about what she was going to say.” 

Mr Ang then asked if Singh agreed with the pair’s view that it would be difficult to explain why Ms Khan lied to Parliament on Aug 3, 2021 without mentioning she was a sexual assault victim.