Hmmmm... Good point!Original Post Deleted
Hmmmm... Good point!Original Post Deleted
Considering that the nanny claims that she was physically and psychologically abused by the wife who wasn't convicted of any wrong doings one must question if the nanny was truthful about her claims, while the conviction regarding the human trafficking, employing a foreign national illegally and making a misrepresentation seems to hold up (although it's not clear if this involved any threats or abuse against the nanny).
It is a common act for locals who 're treating their foreign helpers as a slave or not human anyway.Theyre on duty 24 hrs without freedom and privacy inside the house.Very rare for local employers considering the being human of a helper.
I have a feeling (maybe a inkling) that the defence was trying to discredit her.
At end of the day it is her word against theirs and all the defence needs to do is prove beyond reasonable doubt that she is not a credible witness and the case falls apart for the prosecution.
I do find it weird that that the wife, being a real estate agent would not understand the law and the differences between two different countries. Though it isn't property law it is so quite rational that she should know and seek out understanding.
Sent from somewhere....