Public Prosecutor v Barokah

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Tay Yong Kwang J
• Judgment Date: 11 February 2008
• Neutral Citation: [2008] SGHC 22
• Court: High Court (Singapore)
• Published date: 12 February 2008
• Year: 2008
• Plaintiff Counsel: Amarjit Singh and Stella Tan (Deputy Public Prosecutors)
• Defendant Counsel: Harpreet Singh Nehal SC, Wendell Wong and Kelly Fan (Drew & Napier LLC)
• Subject Matter: Criminal Law,Criminal Procedure and Sentencing
• Citation: [2008] SGHC 22

11 February 2008 Judgment reserved.

The charge

1 The accused is an Indonesian woman born on 15 May 1979. She was working in Singapore as a domestic helper at the material time. She pleaded guilty to the following charge:

That you, Barokah, on the 19^th day of October 2005, sometime between 12.00am and 7.16am, at Block 19 Chai Chee Road #09-328, Singapore, did commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder by causing the death of one Wee Keng Wah, female, 75 years old, to wit, by pushing her out of the bedroom window of her 9^th floor flat, which act was done with the intention of causing her death, and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under section 304(a) of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.

2 The accused was represented in these proceedings by Senior Counsel and his assistants. She was also assisted throughout the court hearing by an interpreter who spoke Bahasa Indonesia.

The statement of facts

3 Wee Keng Wah (“Wee”), the deceased female victim mentioned in the charge, was residing in unit #09-328, a 2-bedroom flat in Block 19 Chai Chee Road (“the HDB block”), with her 78 year old husband, Lee Tang Seng (“Wee’s husband”). Their four children had their own homes elsewhere. Wee’s husband’s age and multiple medical problems (including Parkinson’s disease, weak limbs, severely impaired hearing, diabetes, hypertension, ischaemic heart disease) made it necessary for someone to look after him. For that purpose, the accused was employed as a domestic helper by Wee on 20 September 2005. The accused slept in Wee’s husband’s bedroom in order to attend to him during the night. As a result, Wee and her husband slept in separate bedrooms in the flat.

4 The accused had previously worked in Singapore with three other families. The first was a Malay family living in Bukit Batok, for whom she worked for 16 months between January 2000 and April 2001. In 2003, the accused went to Malaysia to work as a domestic helper for around one year. In September 2004, she returned to Singapore to work for the second family living in Frankel Estate. After about six months, her services were terminated as she was unable to communicate well in English and was forgetful. In March 2005, she was sent to work for a third employer living in a condominium in the eastern part of Singapore. That lasted a few months. On 20 September 2005, the accused started working for Wee, her fourth employer in Singapore in her five years here.

5 In the morning of 19 October 2005, Wee was found lying in a pool of blood at the foot of the HDB block. The cleaner who saw her body informed a resident living in a ground-floor unit of the HDB block. That resident then informed the police.

6 Police officers arrived at the scene. They then proceeded to Wee’s flat on the ninth floor. There, they found Wee’s husband who was teary and in a state of shock. The police officers went into Wee’s bedroom and noted that the metal grilles of the bedroom window (which was directly above where Wee’s body was found) were closed but not locked.

7 The accused was in the flat. She told the police officers that at around 4.30am, she found Wee lying on the floor inside Wee’s bedroom. She tried to rouse Wee but the latter merely moved her hands. As the accused was not able to carry Wee onto the bed, she lifted her body to a sitting position leaning against a bedroom wall. She also claimed that Wee’s husband was present in Wee’s bedroom then. She then went out of the flat with Wee’s husband to seek assistance from a neighbour (Richard Chew) living two doors away. When they returned to the flat, Wee was no longer there.

8 The police managed to glean the following information from Wee’s husband. According to him, at about 3am on 19 October 2005, he needed to urinate. He therefore called for the accused but she did not appear to be around. He then shouted to Wee who was in her bedroom. Wee went to attend to him. She was upset and angry that the accused was not in the flat.

9 Not long thereafter, the accused returned to the flat. Wee scolded her for leaving the flat. Wee’s husband tried to pacify Wee, advising her to speak to the accused at daybreak. He then went back to bed.

10 Sometime past 4am that same morning, Wee’s husband needed to urinate again. He shouted to get the attention of the accused and of Wee but no one responded to his calls. He got up from his bed and walked slowly to the living room. As he passed Wee’s bedroom, he noticed Wee lying on the floor therein. The accused, who was walking from the direction of the toilet located in the kitchen area, attempted to stop him from entering Wee’s bedroom, claiming that Wee was asleep and did not want to be disturbed. However, Wee’s husband insisted on going into Wee’s bedroom and the accused relented. Wee was lying on the floor, unconscious but breathing. Sensing that something was amiss, he walked to Richard Chew’s flat to seek help.

11 When Wee’s husband returned to his flat with Richard Chew, Wee was not in the flat anymore. The accused then informed Wee’s husband that Wee usually went for her morning exercise at that time. Some time later that morning, the police arrived in the flat to inform Wee’s husband about Wee’s body having been found at the foot of the HDB block.

12 The police officers at the scene decided to inform the Special Investigation Section of the Criminal Investigation Department (“CID”). The CID officer brought the accused to Chai Chee Neighbourhood Police Post where she was interviewed again. Due to the numerous inconsistencies in her narration of the events and in the light of preliminary investigations, the accused was treated as a suspect. She was brought to the CID where hand swabs were done and her fingernail clippings were taken.

13 Investigations conducted on and after 19 October 2005 revealed the following evidence pointing to foul play in Wee’s death and militated against the possibility of suicide. As Wee’s body was found directly below her bedroom window, that suggested that it had been dropped from a height. If Wee had jumped out of her bedroom window, her body would have landed further away from the base of the HDB block. The grime-like dirt stains on the right sleeve and the right rear portion of her t-shirt were similar to the grime-like dirt stains found on the top of the air-conditioning compressor installed directly outside the bedroom window, with a drop of 22.2cm from the window ledge. That suggested that Wee’s right upper back had been in contact with the top of the compressor. The top of the compressor also had a fresh drag mark on its left. If Wee had committed suicide, one would have expected to find some evidence of contact between her feet and/or her hands and the compressor. However, there were no foot or hand prints found on the top of the compressor. All the above evidence suggested that Wee had been pushed sideways out of the bedroom window.

14 In Wee’s bedroom, several tiny blood droplets and blood stains were found on the wall and the floor near the window and at the lower portion of a cupboard. There were also blood stains on the bed sheet and on both sides of a pillow case lying on the bed. All the blood droplets and stains were later established to have come from Wee. Strands of Wee’s hair were found along the floor skirting below the window. A plastic rack with rollers had been toppled and had broken into pieces, with its contents scattered about in the bedroom. There was therefore evidence of some fight or struggle having taken place inside the bedroom.

15 A resident living in the flat directly above Wee’s informed the police that at about 4am on 19 October 2005, she was awakened by some loud noise coming from Wee’s flat, lasting a few minutes. It sounded like someone was choking. Another resident living one floor below Wee’s flat said that she was studying for her examinations that morning when she heard a loud thud coming from above her flat. After that, there was a dragging sound lasting several seconds.

16 The autopsy report on Wee revealed that she had multiple bruises on the front of her body, consistent with having fallen from height. The front of her face was flattened. Several abrasions resembling fingernail marks were found on the left of her neck, indicating the possibility of strangulation. The pathologist certified that death resulted from the multiple injuries. He was also of the opinion that Wee had been strangled before she was thrown down the HDB block and that she was alive, although possibly unconscious, when the injuries from the fall were suffered.

17 There was no dispute that the accused had not been ill-treated by Wee or any other member of her family during the one month of her employment. Police investigations revealed that on the night of the incident, the accused sneaked out of the flat to meet her boyfriend. When she returned to the flat, Wee scolded her for leaving the flat late at night. The accused was unhappy with the scolding and therefore retorted that Wee could ask her (Wee’s) son to send her back to the maid agency the next day. The verbal exchange continued for some time and then escalated into a struggle between the two women in Wee’s bedroom. The accused confirmed that the multiple superficial abrasions on her face and arms were caused during her struggle with Wee. This was supported by the forensic findings that Wee’s and the accused’s fingernail clippings were stained with each other’s DNA. The accused admitted in statements made by her to the police that after her struggle with Wee, Wee fainted but was still breathing as the accused could see Wee’s chest and abdomen moving and could hear some sounds coming from Wee.

18 The accused left Wee lying unconscious on the bedroom floor and went to Wee’s husband’s bedroom. Shortly after that, Wee’s husband wanted to go into Wee’s bedroom but was blocked by the accused from doing so as she knew that Wee was unconscious on the bedroom floor. When Wee’s husband...