Mrs Lee Suet Fern was found guilty of professional misconduct beyond a reasonable doubt by the highest court overseeing disciplinary proceedings of lawyers in Singapore, presided over by the Chief Justice. The Law Society of Singapore discharged its statutory duties of self-regulation conscientiously and fairly. Prosecution is not persecution.

• Mrs Lee’s husband was, to her knowledge, a significant beneficiary under the new will
• Mrs Lee acquiesced in her husband cutting Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s lawyer out from communications regarding the preparation and execution of the new will
• Mrs Lee made inaccurate representations to Mr Lee Kuan Yew that the draft last will was precisely the same as the first will, effectively assuring him that it reflected his testamentary wishes and could be used for execution
• Mrs Lee facilitated Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s execution of the draft last will in an unseemly rush even though there was no particular urgency. She blindly followed her husband’s directions
• Because Mrs Lee simply followed her husband’s wishes without considering Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s interest, he ended up signing the last will unaware that it was not the will he wished to re-execute
• After the execution, Mrs Lee did not apprise Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s lawyer fully and frankly of all that had transpired
• Mrs Lee understated her participation in the preparation and execution of the last will before the Disciplinary Tribunal. Her sworn statements on this were rejected by the Court and contradicted by her work colleague subpoenaed by the Law Society

With respect, the writer’s personal, anecdotal recollections cannot trump a judicial verdict. Regrettably, Sir David Lewis has arrogated to himself the status of a final court of appeal in the court of public opinion.