Ken Lim’s lawyer questions a friend of the alleged victim about a ‘very graphic’ description of their encounter

DEFENSE BREAKS WITNESS TO ITS RETRACTION OF EVENTS

Earlier, Mr Tan noted that the witness had previously told the court that she could not remember the sequence of events relayed by the complainant during the video call.

He asked whether this was also the case when she recorded her police statement at the end of 2021.

The friend said that from her first police interview, she told the investigating officer that she could not remember the order in which the complainant told her about the events because she was focused on offering support to the woman.

“From the beginning, I didn’t try to remember the order of things because I didn’t know it was important,” she said.

The friend previously testified that the woman was “very shocked” and that the atmosphere of their video call was “very chaotic.”

On Thursday, the friend provided more details about the video call, including that the woman had “acted” the alleged groping of her breast.

“I remember it so vividly that I can even tell you what she was wearing,” the friend said, adding that the accuser was crossing the road between Tang Plaza and Lucky Plaza in Orchard when she demonstrated how she was allegedly groped.

The girlfriend also said the complainant said she was “forced to kiss him as part of the interview.”

Mr Tan asked whether the complainant said they were kissing at the time Lim allegedly groped her breast. The friend responded in the negative, saying: “They were separate incidents.”

The lawyer asked if the complainant said Lim forced her to kiss him and then groped her, but the friend said she could not remember the sequence of events.

Saying this didn’t matter, Mr Tan repeated: “Do you remember if she told you they were kissing when he grabbed her breast?”

“They didn’t kiss,” the friend said. She immediately asked for more explanation, but Mr Tan intervened, saying this was “not necessary” and that the prosecutor could question her again if she had more to say.

When the accuser later asked what she wanted to elaborate on, the friend said, “I think there is a difference between (when) both participants kiss each other willingly and when they are forced to kiss.

“What (the complainant) told me was that it was an event that was not consented to by either party, nor was it consensual on her part.”

The prosecutor also asked the friend to elaborate on the complainant’s comment that she was forced to kiss Lim “as part of the interview.”

The friend said the woman said she kissed Lim during the interview process.

“It wasn’t that both parties did it consensually. She felt like she had to do it, she was forced to do it,” the friend testified. “It was like she had to complete it to pass this interview.”

Another detail the friend said the woman mentioned was that Lim said he had seen her artwork, which he described as “very dark and gruesome,” and that “he could help her push the boundaries of her work” .

After their video call in November 2021, the friend said there were other times the complainant spoke to her about the alleged assault and shared her “issues” arising from the incident.

In their conversations, the friend said the complainant talked about not being aware of what it meant when she chose “change” during her meeting with Lim, and that if she had known “what that change entailed, namely that she was abused’, she would not have gone to meet him.

The friend also said she did not know police were going to question her about the allegation until they contacted her in late 2021.

She said the context was that the complainant had been hesitant to report the matter to the police, and that she had tried to convince the woman to do so.

She also said the prosecutor was considering other ideas about what to do, such as “doxxing” Lim – making his personal information public online – or “catching him red-handed”, rather than going to the police.

The process continues.