on a side note, I find it utterly hilarious how one can “accidentally” bite a primary school kid’s penis.

SINGAPORE : The lawyer representing a 44-year-old man on trial for sexually abusing an eight-year-old boy was ticked off by the trial judge for asking the victim complicated questions during a cross-examination.

At the High Court on Tuesday, Justice Kan Ting Chiu told lawyer Wee Pan Lee that his questions were “difficult to answer (and) can be misconstrued as an acceptance … he is a child and even I have difficulty understanding”.

Mr Wee, who was acting on behalf of Peter Lee Chee Soon, had earlier asked the boy via video link about the number of times he had been left alone with the accused.

Lee, a taxi driver, is on trial for allegedly performing fellatio on the boy, who was four years old in 2005.

On the advice of Justice Kan, Mr Wee broke down his questions to make them simpler for the Primary Three student to understand.

As a plump, bespectacled Lee sat in the dock taking down notes, Mr Wee disputed the charges, saying the former had been asked to look after the boy on three occasions and not six as claimed by the family.

At no time was Lee alone with the boy during the time of the alleged offence, as Lee’s mother was also present in the flat in Yishun, the lawyer said.

Furthermore, Lee did not perform fellatio but had instead “accidentally” bitten the boy’s penis, said Mr Wee, adding that at no time had his client intentionally taken off the boy’s trousers.

“Not correct,” the boy said through an interpreter, looking visibly tired from the day-long questioning. …

- CNA /ls