Phuong Nga's lawyer requested to suspend the case.

With the collected evidence, the lawyer affirmed that Phuong Nga was wrongly convicted and requested the prosecution agency to suspend the investigation.

In a document nearly 60 pages long, lawyer Nguyen Van Du - defending Truong Ho Phuong Nga on the charge of defrauding Mr. Cao Toan My of 16.5 billion VND - said that there was a series of evidence proving that Miss Vietnam in Russia 2007 and her friend Nguyen Duc Thuy Dung were wronged. From there, he recommended suspending the investigation of the case and suspending the investigation of the two defendants.

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

From April 2012 to December 2013, on average, the two people traveled together domestically or internationally once or twice a month. They stayed at hotels and resorts together; sometimes renting two rooms, sometimes sharing a room. The romantic emails that were spread online were very appropriate to the circumstances, real-life experiences, and feelings of the two people.

Lawyer Du and Phuong Nga on the day she was released on bail. Photo: Quynh Tran.

Regarding the amount of 16,544 billion Nga received, Mr. Du said that it could be considered as money "for buying a house" or "gift" according to a love agreement. However, the evidence collected about the love relationship has proven that this amount of money is not money for buying a house.

Furthermore, there were sums of money that Mr. My transferred into Dung's account, which Mr. My said was to help him buy a house, coinciding with the day he and Nga were traveling together and staying at a hotel together.

"Therefore, the nature of this amount is the money Mr. My gave to Russia under a 2-year agreement of 6 billion, then increased to 7 years of 16 billion, not 16.5 or 16.544 billion as there is a difference in the file. Because 500 million VND is what Mr. My gave in addition to the agreement, 44 million VND is what Mr. My gave to Russia for personal expenses during the time the two of them traveled to the Maldives," the lawyer analyzed.

In addition, Mr. My also transferred the remaining 20 million to Dung's account - also money for Nga to spend when he could not meet and give directly.

The lawyer also said that the receipt of 16.5 billion VND was written, signed, and fingerprinted on November 4, 2013, with the content that Phuong Nga received to buy a house to help Mr. My (Nga claimed that she was controlled and forced to sign) appeared after the time Mr. My accused (for the first time) Nga and Dung of borrowing money to open a Spa and not paying it back.

The documents on the house purchase agreement, money delivery, payment... were proven to be "made after the time Mr. My denounced the house purchase fraud for the second time". "There are documents with the time and place written on the same day that Nga and Mr. My were traveling together elsewhere or had just returned from traveling for a day. Or a few days after writing the documents, the two continued traveling and rented a hotel together," the petition stated.

Regarding Ms. Nguyen Mai Phuong (identified as a witness in the case), through the testimony of Nga, Dung, Lu Minh Nghia, Phuong Nga's mother... it shows her role in the liaison as well as "having a special relationship" with Mr. My. Meanwhile, in court, she stated that she "only knew Mr. My through the press during the trial".

According to lawyer Du, the condition for the crime of Fraudulent appropriation of property is that "the fraudulent act must have occurred before receiving the money". However, the evidence shows that the house purchase documents were all forged after Mr. My's accusation and about a year after the receipt of the money ended. From that, there is enough basis to conclude that Nga and Dung did not commit fraudulent appropriation of property.

"The court's request for additional investigation is unnecessary, because the documents and evidence are sufficient to prove that the prosecution is wrongful. Other requests for additional investigation related to the responsibility of the prosecutor and prison officers should be separated into another case," said lawyer Du.

Speaking to reporters, Prosecutor Duong Thuy Kim Ngan (HCM City People's Procuracy) said that the prosecution agency's decision to suspend the investigation of the case and the defendant "is based on real objective material evidence in the case file". This evidence is consistent with the statements of the defendant, accused and witnesses...

It is the lawyer's right for Phuong Nga's lawyer to request the suspension of the investigation of his client. If the request is based on objective evidence consistent with the testimony of the witnesses, the prosecution agency will refer to it along with the results of the independent investigation and verification... and then make a decision.

After more than two years in detention to investigate allegations of fraud, Nga and Dung were released on bail by the Ho Chi Minh City People's Court on June 29./.

According to VNE