Phuong Nga's lawyer requested that the case be suspended.

Based on the evidence gathered, the lawyer asserted that Phuong Nga was wrongly convicted and requested that the prosecuting authorities suspend the investigation.

In a document nearly 60 pages long, lawyer Nguyen Van Du – defending Truong Ho Phuong Nga on charges of defrauding Mr. Cao Toan My of 16.5 billion VND – argued that there is a wealth of evidence proving that the 2007 Miss Vietnam in Russia and her friend Nguyen Duc Thuy Dung were wrongly accused. Therefore, he requested that the investigation into the case and the investigation against the two defendants be suspended.

According to the lawyer, the nature of the relationship between Mr. My (identified as the victim in the case) and Phuong Nga was romantic, as proven by the testimonies of Nga, Dung, Lu Minh Nghia (Dung's boyfriend), and the collected evidence.

Specifically, from April 2012 to December 2013, the two of them traveled together, either domestically or internationally, once or twice a month. They stayed in hotels and resorts together, sometimes renting two rooms, sometimes sharing a room. The emails containing romantic content that circulated online were consistent with their circumstances, real-life experiences, and feelings for each other.

Lawyer Dũ and Phương Nga on the day she was released on bail. Photo: Quỳnh Trần.

Regarding the 16.544 billion VND received, Mr. Du suggested it could be considered money "for buying a house" or "a gift" based on a romantic agreement. However, evidence gathered about the romantic relationship has proven that this money was not for buying a house.

Furthermore, there were payments that Mr. My transferred to Dung's account, which he claimed were for buying a house, and these payments coincided with the days he and Nga were traveling together and staying in the same hotel.

"Therefore, the nature of this money is that Mr. My gave it to Russia under the agreement of 6 billion VND for 2 years, then increased to 16 billion VND for 7 years, not 16.5 or 16.544 billion VND as there is a discrepancy in the records. Because 500 million VND was an additional gift from Mr. My outside the agreement, and 44 million VND was for Mr. My's personal expenses during their trip to the Maldives," the lawyer analyzed.

In addition, Mr. My also transferred the remaining 20 million to Dung's account - this money was also for Nga's expenses when he couldn't meet her and give it to her directly.

The lawyer also argued that the receipt for 16.5 billion VND, written, signed, and fingerprinted on November 4, 2013, stating that Phuong Nga received the money to buy a house for Mr. My (Nga claimed she was coerced and forced to sign), appeared after Mr. My first accused Nga and Dung of borrowing money to open a spa and failing to repay it.

Furthermore, documents regarding the house purchase agreement, money transfer, and payment were proven to have been "made after Mr. My filed his second complaint" about the fraudulent house purchase. "Some documents have dates and locations that coincide with the days when Nga and Mr. My were traveling together elsewhere, or had just returned from a trip a day earlier. Or, a few days after writing the documents, the two went on another trip and stayed in the same hotel," the petition stated.

Regarding Ms. Nguyen Mai Phuong (identified as a witness in the case), the testimonies of Nga, Dung, Lu Minh Nghia, Phuong Nga's mother, etc., reveal her role in providing information and having a "special relationship" with Mr. My. Meanwhile, in court, she testified that she "only knew Mr. My through the press during the days of the trial."

According to lawyer Dũ, the condition for constituting the crime of fraud and appropriation of property is that "the fraudulent act must occur before the receipt of money." However, evidence shows that the house purchase documents were forged after Mr. Mỹ filed the complaint and about a year after the money was received. Therefore, there is sufficient basis to conclude that Nga and Dung did not commit fraud and appropriation of property.

"The court's request for further investigation is unnecessary, as the evidence is sufficient to prove that the indictment and prosecution were wrongful. Other requests for further investigation related to the responsibility of the prosecuting officers and prison officials should be separated into a different case," lawyer Dũ stated.

Speaking to reporters, Prosecutor Duong Thuy Kim Ngan (Ho Chi Minh City People's Procuracy) stated that the decision to suspend the investigation of the case and the investigation of the suspect "is based on objective, real physical evidence in the case file." This evidence is consistent with the statements of the suspect, the defendant, and the witnesses...

It is the lawyer's right to request the suspension of the investigation against Phuong Nga. If the request is based on objective evidence consistent with witness testimonies, the prosecuting authority will consider it along with the results of independent investigation and verification... and then make a decision.

After more than two years in detention for investigation into fraud charges, Nga and Dung were released on bail by the Ho Chi Minh City People's Court on June 29.

According to VNE