18th Sep
SINGAPORE -- The trial of former TV presenter Vidya Shankar Aiyar
began on Thursday, with the woman who accuses him of molesting her
on Nov 3 last year giving her account of what happened.
In a district court on Thursday, the 30-year-old woman who was
dressed in a black pantsuit, took the stand to say that she could
not remember how she ended up at Shankar's home. The last thing she
could recall was passing out drunk while in a taxi with him, she
said.
District Judge Victor Yeo ordered that the media publish no
information that might lead to her being identified.
She is the first of 14 witnesses for the prosecution.
The woman told the court that she met him at a party given by a
mutual friend at a terrace house in Holland Village on the night of
Nov 2 and he kept trying to chat her up.
She'd had two glasses of red wine before the party, and drank three
more at the party, and a couple of mouthfuls of a margarita
cocktail.
She was already drunk when she wanted to leave and he offered to
take her home.
Though she gave the taxi driver her address, Shankar told him to go
to Lorong Chuan, she said.
She said she insisted that the taxi go to her home and Shankar
argued with the cabby, but she dozed off.
When she opened her eyes, she said, she was lying on her right
side, and Shankar was lying naked behind her.
19th Sep
THE woman who accused former television presenter Vidya Shankar
Aiyar of twice molesting her at his home last year, was herself
accused of being affectionate with him, lying on his lap and
kissing him at a party.
Shankar is a gentleman, says the former TV presenter's lawyer. --
ONG CHIN KAI
Cross-examining the 30-year-old woman on Day Two of the trial,
lawyer Subhas Anandan called her a liar and accused her of
fabricating the whole thing.
She had told the court on Thursday that she could not remember how
she ended up naked at Shankar's home after a party, and that the
last thing she remembered was passing out drunk while with him in a
taxi.
Mr Subhas ripped into her account, quizzed her on her sexual
history and her attitude towards sex.
He offered this version of what happened that night:
At the party, as she slowly and steadily got more drunk, she became
more and more affectionate towards Shankar, he said.
Mr Subhas put it to her that she had kissed him, held his hand,
touched his thighs and caressed his buttocks.
She disagreed.
He told her that at the party, she had lain on Shankar's lap as he
stroked her hair and kissed her on the forehead.
She said she did not remember.
The lawyer portrayed his client, a 37-year-old bachelor, as a
perfect gentleman.
After she threw up at the party, did Shankar not clean up the
bathroom after her, hold her as she walked unsteadily down the
stairs, and get her a glass of water, he asked.
Yes, said the woman, Shankar was acting like a gentleman - up till
that point.
Mr Subhas said that in the taxi, Shankar asked her to rest at his
home at Lorong Chuan and she took up his offer.
She disagreed.
Once they reached his home, the lawyer continued, she took off her
cardigan in the living room and went straight to his bedroom.
Shankar brought in a fan when she told him she was feeling hot, he
said.
Shankar then suggested, said the lawyer, that she take off her
clothes as she might throw up again.
So she started taking off her toga top, and he helped her because
she was unsteady.
He also helped her to remove the skirt she was 'trying to struggle
out of'.
The woman said she did not remember this.
But when the lawyer suggested that Shankar had helped her to take
off her panties as she lay on the bed, she said it was
unlikely.
'You were too drunk to remember,' Mr Subhas told her.
He said that Shankar then put a quilt over her and she went to
sleep.
She said: 'I do not remember. If he was such a gentleman, he would
have at least put a T-shirt on me to preserve my modesty.'
The lawyer retorted: 'You wanted your clothes to be taken
off.'
She shot back: 'So he climbed into bed next to me, himself
undressed? Would that be okay? I think not.'
That was just one of several heated exchanges between the lawyer
and the woman, who was dressed in a pinstriped jacket and
calf-length skirt yesterday.
More than a dozen spectators, mainly middle-aged men, were in court
yesterday, and extra chairs had to be brought in for them.
Also in court were Shankar's family, including his father and
sister.
New hearing dates will be fixed next Tuesday for the trial, which
is expected to resume early in November.
HEATED EXCHANGES
Lawyer: If the accused told you (that) you took your clothes off
yourself, and he assisted you to take your clothes off, are you in
a position to dispute?
Witness: I know for sure I didn't take off my underwear. It's not
something you will forget even if you're drunk. It's part of being
a woman.
Lawyer: I put it to you, you're so drunk, you could not know if
you were Chinese, Indian, 30 years old or three years old.
Witness: I was not insane. If you do not know your race, your
age, your gender, you must be insane.
Lawyer: You were so highly intoxicated that you may be close to
insanity.
Witness: Your Honour, is Counsel a psychologist?
Lawyer: I am a poor and humble lawyer.
Witness: Then you shouldn't be making such an assumption.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawyer: Once you entered the flat, you headed straight into the
bedroom.
Witness: I've never been at his flat before, how would I know
where his bedroom was?
Lawyer: It's a small flat, when you open the door, you can see
it. You don't need a compass to see the direction.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawyer: Your friend described the accused as sleazy... You got
yourself drunk at a party, vomited at your hostess' place, did
things you could not remember. How would you describe
yourself?
Witness: Most unfortunate. For having trusted someone to take me
home when he had other intentions in mind.
Source: Asiaone