Connect with us

Court Cases

None of ten accused in S$1.8 billion money laundering case granted bail amidst ongoing probe

On Wednesday, the ten accused in a prominent money laundering case appeared virtually in court, with their lawyers challenging continued remand. However, none were granted bail.

The previous day, prosecutors disclosed that over S$1.8 billion (US$1.3 billion) in assets had been seized in the ongoing investigation.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: On Wednesday (6 Sept), all ten accused individuals  who were apprehended last month in connection with a colossal S$1.8 billion (approximately US$1.3 billion) money laundering case, made a virtual appearance in court for further proceedings.

Despite the efforts of their counsels to contest the prosecutor’s request for continued remand, none of the ten accused were granted bail.

For five of the suspects, Su Wenqiang, Wang Dehai, Chen Qingyuan, Zhang Ruijin, and Lin Baoying, their bail reviews are set for 18 October, and no bail will be granted until that date.

In the meantime, the case of the accused Wang Baosen will be mentioned in court on 4 October, and the case of Su Baolin is scheduled for a pre-trial conference on the same date.

The ten accused, including nine men and one woman aged between 31 and 44, were apprehended during an islandwide raid on 15 August conducted by over 400 officers led by the Commercial Affairs Department (CAD).

These individuals have different nationalities but share a common origin in Fujian.

On Tuesday (5 Sept), prosecutors revealed to the Singapore High Court that the police have seized control of more than S$1.8 billion (approximately US$1.3 billion) in assets as they continue to investigate a historic money laundering case in the city-state.

Update on the ongoing trial for one of the remaining nine suspects:

Judge denies bail for Wang Baosen , citing high flight risk and international connections

The prosecution contended that Wang Baosen, a Chinese national (31) should not be granted bail, citing an affidavit from an investigating officer as the basis for their argument.

Wang’s lawyer, Adrian Wee, countered by asserting that his client, who has been on remand for 22 days, should be released on bail.

He raised objections to three primary points mentioned in the affidavit: the seriousness of Wang’s offences, the potential for him to flee, and the risk of collusion with his cousin, referred to as “Y.”

Later in the day, District Judge Tan became convinced that there was indeed a “real and high flight risk,” along with concerns about potential collusion. Consequently, she decided to deny Wang’s bail.

The judge noted that Wang was a foreigner on a dependent pass, holding two foreign passports issued by different countries.

She referred to the investigating officer’s affidavit, which indicated that Wang received income from overseas.

“Information points to (him) being a high flight risk because he has no roots or at best tenuous roots” in Singapore, the judge said, noting that Wang had the means to relocate elsewhere.

Judge denies bail for Su Baolin, citing dual passports and international assets

On Wednesday, Su Baolin, a Cambodian national, his two charges were amended to include an accusation of engaging in a conspiracy with Wang Qiming to create a false document for the purpose of committing fraud in December 2020.

This document was a “borrowing agreement” dated Dec 20, 2019, which Su allegedly had with another individual named Se Liang, with the intent to deceive Standard Chartered Bank.

Ms Ng applied for no bail in Su’s case, citing the seriousness of his offences and his potential as a flight risk, among other reasons.

The prosecution emphasized that Su was neither a Singapore citizen nor a permanent resident and that he owned a condominium in China worth 11 million yuan (US$1.5 million), indicating that he had the means to establish a comfortable residence abroad.

Su’s legal team advocated for bail under specific conditions, suggesting a Singaporean bailor and electronic tagging,

They argued that Su’s family was in Singapore, he had a congenital heart disease requiring vital treatment from Singaporean doctors, and his passports were seized with assets frozen, limiting his ability to leave the country.

Nonetheless, the judge rejected Su Baolin’s bail application, citing his foreign status with two passports from different countries and his capability to relocate, given his ownership of a condominium in China.

“The fact that his family has moved to Singapore does not mean that he will not abscond,” the judge said.

Su Jianfeng, a Ni-Vanuatu national (35)

The prosecution is pursuing a no-bail application for Su, a Ni-Vanuatu citizen, based on an affidavit filed by an investigating officer, which highlights concerns about the 35-year-old being a potential flight risk.

Su’s attorney requested an adjournment to consult with his client, and the bail review for Su is scheduled for 8 October, with no bail being granted in the interim.

Vang Shuiming, a Turkish national (42)

After Vang’s unsuccessful release application on Tuesday, his lawyer Wendall Wong requested a brief adjournment, explaining that he was reevaluating the High Court’s stance.

Vang’s counsel sought additional time to gather comprehensive instructions from his client, as he had only received the affidavit from the Commercial Affairs Department (CAD) officer during the ongoing High Court hearing on Tuesday.

Consequently, the 42-year-old Turk will remain in remand for the time being.

Vang’s bail review is scheduled for 14 September, though it may be rescheduled if additional time is required to prepare affidavits.

Su Wenqiang, a Cambodian national (31)

The prosecution also requested a no-bail application for the suspect.

Su’s attorney pointed out that, similar to the others, he had only received the investigating officer’s affidavit late on Tuesday and needed time to consult with his client.

Su Wenqiang (Source: Lianhe Zaobao)

The defense lawyer requested bail for Su until the next hearing.

Deputy Public Prosecutor Edwin Soh objected to this request, citing a lack of substantial arguments presented in support of the bail application.

Speaking through a Mandarin interpreter in court, Su stated: “During this period, I have cooperated fully with the investigating officer and have been truthful. ”

“My cooperation has demonstrated that I am not connected to the other accused individuals. I have minimal interaction with them, including financially. This is a matter pertaining solely to me, and I have conveyed all the details to the investigating officer.”

Su’s lawyer then informed Su that they would meet in the next two days to discuss the court proceedings and address his concerns.

Su Wenqiang faces two count of charge, including  money laundering and converting benefits obtained from criminal conduct.

He used these benefits to purchase a Mercedes Benz vehicle worth S$500,000 around 28 January 2022.

Su had reportedly facilitated an illegal remote gambling service from the Philippines to individuals in the People’s Republic of China.

 Wang Dehai, a Cypriot national (34)

The prosecution applied for bail to be denied to Wang, citing the reasons outlined in an affidavit submitted by an investigating officer.

Wang’s lawyer requested an adjournment to gather instructions from her client, as she had last met with the 34-year-old Cypriot on 2 September.

Additionally, the lawyer expressed the intention to submit a request for Wang’s family members to visit him.

Wang’s bail review is scheduled for 18 October.

Chen Qingyuan, a Cambodian national (33)

Deputy Public Prosecutor Foo Shihao argued against granting bail to the 33-year-old Cambodian, citing an affidavit from an investigating officer as the basis for this stance.

He also pointed out an error in the affidavit, which incorrectly stated the amount involved as S$18 million, whereas the accurate figure should be S$8 million.

Mr Foo sought permission to submit a corrected affidavit.

Chen’s lawyer, Mark Tan, explained that he had not yet received instructions from his client and requested time to prepare a response affidavit.

Chen expressed a desire to communicate with his family but was advised to submit a written request.

Chen then requested the earliest possible opportunity to make a phone call, expressing concern for his children starting school during his 23-day remand.

He said through an interpreter: “I have been remanded for 23 days, and my children are starting school. I don’t know if they are facing difficulties, so I am very worried.”

He also asked to meet with his lawyer soon to discuss his family situation and case. His lawyer replied that the earliest meeting would be early next week.

Zhang Ruijin, a Chinese national (44)

Similar to the others, the prosecution argued against granting bail to Zhang.

Zhang’s lawyer, Loo Choon Chiaw, informed the court that he had received the affidavit late on Tuesday and had not yet been able to obtain instructions from his client. He requested additional time to file a response affidavit.

Additionally, Loo applied for Zhang’s brother, Zhang Ruisheng, to visit his client.

However, Mr Foo pointed out that authorities had previously denied such a visit due to Zhang Ruisheng also being under investigation, with a statement recorded from him last month. The parties were instructed to address this matter outside of court.

Zhang also expressed concerns about his deteriorating health, stating, “I have anxiety, and I can only sleep for a few hours. I request to see my psychiatrist. I am having a difficult time inside here. Sometimes my anxiety lasts 20 to 30 minutes. I feel pain all over my body, and my hands tremble as well,” through an interpreter.

The judge advised Zhang to approach the prison doctor and consult with his lawyer regarding his health concerns.

Lin Baoying, a Chinese national (43)

Prosecutor Ng asked that no bail be extended to Lin, the only woman among the 10.

Her lawyer Loo Choon Chiaw asked for time to take instructions as he had received the affidavit filed by a CAD officer on Tuesday.

Share this post via:
Continue Reading
4 Comments
Subscribe
Notify of
4 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Foreigners providing good jobs for Singaporeans, indeed. Property agents, bankers, CAD investigation officers, car dealers, lawyers, etc … all employed because pappies welcomed such foreigners.

while many are struggling to put food on table

Next time can ask them apply Family Office? What do you think? tsk tsk tsk

Trending

Discover more from Gutzy Asia

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue Reading