The Iris Koh Trial - 25th Feb 2026 - My Notes From Open Court
For those of you familiar with my reports on this case last year when I was brand new to this (have never attended court in my life before that), I thank you for your support. The videos from 2025 (more will be coming soon), can be found in this playlist on my main YouTube channel:
I've also been working on interview videos and if I manage to interview the accused or anyone else who is legally allowed to be interviewed from these proceedings, they will be available as special or full episodes on my interview channel, The Zephyr Show:
The accused in these trial proceedings include Iris Koh, Dr Jipson Quah, and Thomas Chua, who face multiple charges connected to the alleged fake COVID-19 vaccination case in Singapore.
The Iris Koh Trial - 25th Feb 2026
I arrived after lunch, as I had to accompany my Dad who was deciding on an open-heart surgery date in the morning, to the National Heart Centre.
Here are the notes as I took them, edited for grammar and punctuation only, for easier reading.
At some parts in these notes, the Prosecution will be referred to as "Pros" for short. This is not meant to be a thesis, or something for a news channel, so the notes are as I could take them down, not necessarily in the most polished English, phrasing or even structure as an "article". Just notes, just notes.
Witness in the chair is Mr. Lee Woon Lin, Senior Assistant Director, Enforcement, at Ministry of Health.
When I entered, the Prosecution was questioning the Witness.
Pros: What was your occupation in 2022?
I believe I was investigation officer at the same branch at the Ministry of Health.
Polite discussion went on for a bit, regarding an exhibit that the Prosecution presented.
It was a document with apparently really small writing based on the Judge’s and one of the lawyers' comments.
The prosecution reads out Mehrajunnishah Mrs. Quaide Millath, one of the previous witness’ names and asks the current Witness, Lee Woon Lin to confirm the name.
Iris Koh, one of the defendants, objects to the document in it’s current resolution and size as she mentions it is difficult to read, and it IS an important document since it concerns a “serology test” as Iris mentioned.
The Prosecution expressed his apologies and mentioned that it was “the original copy”.
The Judge and prosecution have some debate about how long is needed to make the copy clearer, perhaps by making it larger through various methods.
The Judge asks him to take 10-15 if possible instead of the requested 30 minutes, to try and see if he could blow up the copy using a photocopier at a different level in the building.
- Short Break -
After returning with apparently a slightly larger copy, Ms Iris clarifies that certain sections might still be a blur and the Judge helps her with the information contained there.
The prosecution continues to ask Mr. Lee Woon Lin about the document, by first reminding him about what happened before the break, and how Mr. Lee Woon Lin said it was too small. He says that he would now like to ask him about the document, and starts with the person who was being investigated’s name, Mehrajunnishah Mrs Quaide Millath.
The prosecution asks what these subjects, 3 of them as mentioned by the Witness earlier in his testimony, were doing at the offices where these investigations were being conducted at night.
The witness said the were assisting in the investigations.
The Witness agreed upon being asked, that a test was conducted on Mehrajunnishah.
Pros asks how it was conducted.
He says it took about half an hour and it was conducted by a team from Raffles Medical.
What happened after that, Pros asks.
I escorted the Raffles Medical team out, the witness says.
On 21st January 2022, at around 10-11am, I received Mehrajunnishah’s test results from the Raffles Medical Team.
Pros asks, what were the rest results.
The witness says it was as in the report.
The prosecution then asks about certain samples taken for the test
The prosecution also says that the witness said earlier that “the results were as in the report”, so what is in the report?
The witness reads out a few sections, but also says he doesn’t have the medical expertise to interpret the results, and that during the time of receiving these results, he had asked for help to interpret them, and an officer told him that it was a positive serology test.
The officer also told him that a test can be positive in two instances, one being that the person has received a Covid-19 vaccination, and the other is that the person has been infected with Covid-19 prior.
The pros asks the witness about the validity of the assisting officer (the one who interpreted the results)’s medical expertise.
The witness said he was a registered medical professional but he can’t verify that personally.
The witness and the prosecution spoke a little but about vaccination statuses.
The prosecution asked if the witness was aware of the Singapore Police Force conducting investigations and about his involvement in these investigations.
The witness mentioned he wouldn’t be involved.
The prosecution says that certain words have been cut off in the Serology test document in front of them and asks if the witness is aware why these words have been cut off. The witness says no.
After a while, the prosecution ends its questionining.
Mr. Adrian Wee, counsel for Dr. Jipson Quah, then takes over for a cross-examination.
Adrian Wee asked him what he did as part of his work, during this investigation’s period. The witness said he had a team of investigators under him, and they would discuss their cases with him.
Adrian Wee clarifies the Witness’ role further and asks for the “structure of the team during this investigation”.
The Witness addresses the Judge and asks if this information should be internal to M.O.H. (Ministry of Health). The Judge says the witness can decide that as he’s the one present, who's from M.O.H..
The witness then replies to Adrian Wee and says that this information is "internal to MOH" and he doesn’t share it.
Adrian Wee asks WHY not?
The witness says something about the investigation procedure being confidential (I didn’t hear this part exactly word for word), but Adrian replied to his reply, and told the Judge that “eventually the court will have to decide on this, but I will try to work around it, your honour.”
Adrian Wee asks the witness if he was a Senior Assistant Director at that time.
The witness says he doesn’t understand the question.
Adrian Wee says that if the witness doesn’t answer his questions clearly, we would be here for a very long time.
The witness says he doesn’t understand the question. Adrian asks again if he was a Senior Assistant Director at that time.
The Witness says no.
Adrian asks if he was perhaps just an Assistant Director then?
The witness says he cannot recall if he was.
Adrian Wee goes back and forth trying to understand the structure of the team, and questions the witness rigorously on whether he was a senior manager, an assistant director, or what exactly he was at the time.
The witness had mentioned earlier that there were multiple investigators on this case, of various ranks and responsibilities.
Adrian Wee asks if some of these other ranked officers reported directly to the witness. The witness mentioned that he believes that information would be internal to MOH.
Adrian Wee addresses the Judge and says he would try to reserve his position and work around it as best he could but he is trying to deal with the "confidentiality issue" (he said he would refer to the answers by the Witness to the effect of "internal to MOH", as a "confidentiality issue" loosely, for ease of discussion with the Judge) that’s coming up.
Adrian tries again to get the information but fails, and then would like to “beseech the judge” to instruct the witness to explain the structure of the investigation because he says the witness has brought up the existence of all these other officers but refuses to tell him who they are.
The prosecution objects, citing a provision, a “section 1” or something somewhere that says that a personnel or professional cannot be compelled to reveal certain information under certain conditions etc. (I don’t have the exact paragraph but that was the gist of it).
The witness is asked to leave for a moment while Mr. Adrian Wee, the judge and the prosecution discuss how to proceed to get certain answers, and a discussion about “relevance” vs. “confidentiality”, with mr Adrian wee mentioning that he’s using the term confidentiality loosely, to refer to the witness’s stance of “the information being internal to MOH” when he answered that several times.
The witness is brought back. Adrian Wee proceeds to question the Witness further.
He asks the witness about a Bryan, and asks if Bryan made a police report.
The witness says yes, and Adrian Wee goes on to quiz him from multiple angles. Even the judge steps in to ask if Bryan reported directly to the witness, and the witness says yes.
Despite much questioning, it comes back to “I believe that information is internal to the MOH”.
The witness did submit that Bryan reported directly to the Witness, but not exclusively to the Witness. When Adrian Wee asked who else, he went back to “I believe that information is internal to the MOH”.
When Adrian Wee pushes to find out who asked Bryan to make a police report, the Witness maintains that he cannot recall but that it could have been other people.
Adrian Wee did mention at one point that he thought that the Witness was being deliberately evasive. The witness politely disagreed and maintained that some information was internal to the MOH.
Adrian Wee eventually sat down and the Prosecution maintained that their position was the same about the topic of not disclosing certain information and that that would be up to the Witness to decide, in their capacity as a working professional in their industry.
The judge then asks the lawyers if there is any indication that Ms Zahara had stated who she reported to and if we already have this information. Adrian Wee checks the records and addresses the witness and lets the witness know that Ms. Zahara on the stand had let the court know that she reported to Lee Woon Lin, the witness.
He asked the witness if that was true. The witness said yes.
Adrian Wee also asked some questions about what Ms Zahara had said about a "Bryan" and who she reported to and there was some back and forth between the judge and Adrian about what information they already had and didn’t have.
After some further short questions, Adrian Wee mentioned to the judge that he had established sufficient groundwork for him to further prepare his case and that he needed a break for about 20 minutes.
After the break, Adrian Wee proceeds to continue questioning the Witness. Adrian asks about arranging tests for other patients in addition to the 3 patients that had been mentioned today. The witness says that to the best of his recollection, there were only tests arranged for these 3 patients.
Adrian asked, "Why would MOH only arrange tests for these 3 patients?" The witness says that his supervisors or superiors gave him instructions and other than that he believes the information is internal to MOH.
Adrian explains his understand (and then confirms with the witness) that “I don’t know” and “internal to MOH” are two different answers, AND, that earlier (after the most recent break) he said “internal to MOH” but then he changed his answer to “I don’t know”. The witness confirms.
Adrian then confirms that someone else interpreted the test results, not the witness himself.
Adrian: You were then given instructions after the interpretation of the test results to contact NIR (National Immunisation Registry) regarding these 3 patients and this was not done on your own interpretation, but under instructions by someone else, correct?
Yes.
And why contact NIR?
“To rectify the vaccination status”
And what is rectify?
“To change the vaccination status”
And by “Change”, although you didn’t know why the instructions came, you WOULD know WHAT you were doing to the vaccination status, correct?
After some back and forth, the Witness states, “it was to change from vaccinated to unvaccinated”.
Adrian summarises and asks, "Wouldn’t it then follow, that the MOH was acting on the results of the serological test?"
Witness says, let me clarify, that I got instructions after the test, from my management, to rectify the vaccination status.
Adrian: If you only had the test results from only Mehrajunnisha, why were you instructed to change THREE sets of test results, including Mehrajunnisha?
Witness: There could have been other information that could have let to this.
Adrian asked if he was sure of this. The witness said to the best of his recollection that’s what he recalls.
Adrian then shows the Witness a list and goes back and forth with the witness on certain things like if he can recall why certain individuals have had their vaccination statuses deleted, if they are the spouse of a Caucasian man previously mentioned during today’s hearing, etc.
Adrian says that/asks if the decision to rectify the vaccination statuses was a decision above the witness’ position in the management. The witness agrees.
Adrian asks the witness who Adrian should or would speak to if he wanted to find out about the reason for the rectification. The witness says, “I don’t know if I can answer you that question”.
Eventually, he goes back to “I don’t know” after another question.
The judge steps in to let the witness know that if he doesn’t know, he should say he doesn’t know, not that he doesn’t know if he cannot answer the question.
Adrian then changes topic to say that Mr. Bryan Tan picked up Mr. Thomas Chua from his car, for a briefing. The witness says he cannot confirm as he cannot remember.
Adrian says that Bryan Tan has told “us” (probably the court), that the briefing took place DAYS before the 20th of January. The witness cannot recall.
Adrian – I told Mr. Tan that there was no immediate urgency to pick up Mr. Chua, at the time of the briefing, and Mr. Tan agreed with me. Can YOU confirm with me that there was no immediate urgency to pick up Mr. Chua at the time of the briefing?
I cannot recall.
Same question again by Adrian but for Dr. Quah (picking him up).
I cannot recall.
Did you keep notes as OC Team Leader (a term for the team they worked in – at least this is what was audible from where the audience was sitting) about your work?
If things are important I will keep notes. Adrian asks if this briefing would be important.
The witness says he cannot recall if he kept notes on this briefing.
The witness alternates between terms like “don’t know” “cannot recall”, and so on, and the judge reminds him that he needs to be very CLEAR about his answers, as Adrian Wee proceeds in his questions.
Adrian Wee chisels down and explains to the witness that, sometimes, you say you “cannot recall”, you even said you “do not recall this briefing”, but you clearly said that you “did not keep notes for this briefing”. I would suggest to you that you are deliberately withholding information from us. You can agree or disagree.
Disagree.
Adrian Wee asks a few more questions about notes about this meeting and states that he would be asking the Witness under oath the next day about these notes.
Adrian also states to the judge that his “premise” is not to ask the witness about the contents of the notes the next day, but that it is not acceptable that a witness comes to court and says “I don’t recall” or “I don’t know” without full efforts being made to find and locate any notes that would have been taken during said briefing as discussed earlier.
Judge wants to break for the day.
Ms Iris states that there are certain things which look like they are missing (on a document, to my best recollection). The judge and Iris and the lawyers clarify that and he closes the court for the day, to resume at 930 the next day. This was around 5:14pm.
- Court Adjourned For The Day -
Disclaimer: These are personal court notes of mine, from Open Court, in Singapore. These notes were taken down by me personally during court, on Microsoft Word as fast and as logically as I could type. I apologise in advance if some parts appear a little informal. The notes are accurate (to my best understanding), although not necessarily complete. I have deliberately not written down some parts from the hearing, which I could not type down accurately and/or quickly enough, due to the speed of the verbal interactions between the different parties, and/or the interest with which I was listening in awe to the proceedings. In these cases and for these parts, I did not want to risk noting down anything inaccurately. Also, it is a best practice in Singapore to NOT pre-judge the case publicly, including on social media etc. It is best to stay away from any judgement on the case, till the Judge and the Courts have made their final decision and due process has been followed. Please check legal websites in Singapore to know what is allowed and what is not allowed, for your own actions in accordance with the law.
Purpose & Intention: The purpose of these notes is to provide some of you who have never attended Open Court before, an insight into the legal process in Singapore, which in my humble opinion, is rigorous and sound, for this criminal trial. It's been a privilege to be able to attend Open Court. I highly recommend anyone in Singapore to attend Open Court to experience it for themselves. At the time of typing this article, 1:10am on March 11th, 2026, according to https://www.judiciary.gov.sg/attending-court/guide-to-attending-court, "Any member of the public may attend open court hearings in the Supreme Court or State Courts. These have limited seats and are available on a first-come, first-served basis. Hearings conducted using Zoom will be streamed on TV screens in the courtrooms."
Thank you for reading, and see you in the next article.
Love,
Zephyr
I started experiencing miracles in my life (proof after you click the image below), which could NOT be just considered "coincidence".
You can learn how to connect with your Spirit Guides, Spirit Guardians, Guardian Angels, Ancestors, Spirit Animals and More! It's a short 33-minute lesson, split into shorter bite-sized chapters, and you can implement it in your life immediately, in any situation, even if you're a beginner to Spirituality. If you're already a Spiritual Practitioner of any kind, this incantation can lazer-focus the guidance you receive for your clients, from their own Guides (and no other random entities). Check it out and the sensational results I've achieved... here:
Check out my Spiritual Takes and Reports on Current Affairs playlist here:
Check out The Zephyr Khambatta Podcast here:
Check out episodes of The Zephyr Show here:
📺 OTHER VIDEOS
🎥 Zephyr Khambatta - Channel
❤️ Self-Care, Success & Mental Health
🤳🏼 All Vlogs
✈️ Travel Vlogs
🎙️ The Zephyr Khambatta Podcast
🎙️ The Zephyr Khambatta Podcast - Shorts
🎙️ The Zephyr Show (Interviews)
🎶 All My Original Music
🙏🏼 Spiritual Life
🦶🏼 Barefoot Journey
📚 Book Reviews
🎹 MY MUSIC
Check Out The Music Video for my single Awaken, released 22.11.2024.
► https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6NAkoU8bUo
Check Out The MV Of My Pop/Dance Track, "Jungles (Dance Mix)" which peaked at No. 22 Worldwide on Apple Music's Playlist, New Music Daily, in 2022.
► https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_I6ftBkSdII
Check Out The MV Of My Pop Track, "Sail Away" which was featured by MTV Asia and VH1 India 30 times in its release month, June 2017.
► https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yM2o_0z1dQg
Apple Music ► https://apple.co/3ZIjxqO
Spotify ► https://spoti.fi/3kSatAX
JioSaavn ► https://bit.ly/ZephyrJioSaavn
💡 "Zephyr Khambatta" on music platforms.
💰 DISCOUNTS & RECOMMENDATIONS
BAREFOOT SHOES
► Vivobarefoot Primus Lite 3 (Men), seems cheaper on Amazon than official website – https://amzn.to/3TLu6IN
► Vivobarefoot Primus Lite 3 (Women), seems cheaper on Amazon than official website – https://amzn.to/3I1wx7E
► Suave sneaker-style barefoot shoes, various colours & styles – https://amzn.to/3Ga5KWb
► 20% off Vivo Barefoot (Official Website) – https://vivobarefoot.mention-me.com/m/ol/jf3wk-e3ecf04a44
SPIRITUAL HEALING
► 🔮 Engage Adrian Ng (Singapore) for Quantum Healing Hypnosis Technique (where you access your SuperConscious, Higher Self or Source) - Whatsapp him at +65 9800 0651. Mention discount code "Zephyr" to get 10% off!
🎥 VIDEO TOOLS FROM AMAZON
► My (Cheap) Wireless Mics For Outdoor Interviews & Vlogging: PGDLOF Lavalier Clip-On Mics (Clips Rotate 360 Degrees) for iPhone & iPad - 2 Clip-on Microphones - https://amzn.to/3PE5vDp
► My (Not So Cheap) Wireless Mics For Outdoor Interview & Vlogging: Hollyland Lark M2 Lavalier Mics for iPhone/Android/Camera/PC/Laptop with Lightning + USB-C Connectors - https://amzn.to/4fQmYoZ
► My Tripod Stand For The Camera - https://amzn.to/3ZgyXTD
► My Camera: Apple iPhone SE 3rd Gen - https://amzn.to/3y3W7Rc
🫂 NEWSLETTERS & GROUPS
😇 Join My Self-Care & Success Group on FACEBOOK
😇 Join My Self-Care & Success Group On TELEGRAM
😇 Join My Self-Care & Success Group On LINKEDIN
Hey there, Zephyr here. I hope you enjoyed reading the post.
👨🏻🦲 Book me for talks, seminars, sponsorships, affiliate deals or mentorship:
If you'd like to book me for a talk for your company, department or event, or if you need personal mentorship, teaching, therapy or spiritual healing with regards to relationships, mental health, holistic health, body sculpting, life, authenticity, career or the creative industries, or if you'd like to speak about a sponsorship or affiliate deal, check out my testimonials here and/or browse the header of this website.
Then reach out to me at [email protected]
My Socials
YouTube
Instagram
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
TikTok
🧿
