Public Prosecutor v BMU
| Jurisdiction | Singapore |
| Judge | Dedar Singh Gill J |
| Judgment Date | 28 October 2020 |
| Neutral Citation | [2020] SGHC 231 |
| Court | High Court (Singapore) |
| Docket Number | Criminal Case No 62 of 2018 |
| Year | 2020 |
| Published date | 03 November 2020 |
| Hearing Date | 25 June 2020 |
| Plaintiff Counsel | Eugene Lee, Kelly Ho and Tan Yen Seow (Attorney-General's Chambers) |
| Defendant Counsel | Sofia Bennita d/o Mohamed Bakhash (Lexcompass LLC) |
| Subject Matter | Criminal Law,Offences,Sexual assault by penetration,Criminal Procedure and Sentencing,Sentencing,Principles |
| Citation | [2020] SGHC 231 |
The accused faced 24 charges in the present case. He pleaded guilty to and was convicted on three charges of sexual assault by penetration under s 376(2)(
The accused consented to the 21 remaining charges being taken into consideration for the purpose of sentencing. With regard to each of the proceeded charges, I imposed a sentence of 11 years’ imprisonment and 12 strokes of the cane. I ordered the sentences for the fourth and the seventh charges to run consecutively and the sentence for the 23rd charge to run concurrently. The accused was sentenced to a total of 22 years’ imprisonment and 24 strokes of the cane, with the custodial sentence backdated to the date of remand, 7 May 2017. The accused has appealed against his sentence. I now set out my grounds.
Statement of FactsAt the time of the hearing, the accused was 36 years old and the victim was 13 years old. The accused is a divorcee and has a daughter who was then 14 years old. The accused was a logistics delivery attendant and the boyfriend of the victim’s mother at the material time.
The victim is the eldest of her mother’s three children. Her younger brother and sister were aged 11 and 9 years old respectively. Among the three children, the victim shared the closest relationship with the accused.
Background eventsFollowing a divorce from the victim’s father in October 2002, the victim’s mother and her three children (including the victim) lived with the victim’s grandmother in a flat located in Woodlands (the “Woodlands Flat”). The victim’s mother and the accused began a romantic relationship sometime in 2013. The accused was known to the three children as “Uncle Adam”. On occasion, he would stay overnight in the living room of the Woodlands Flat. The victim’s mother and the three children slept in one of the bedrooms.
In July 2015, the victim’s mother and her three children moved into a two-room rental flat (the “Flat”). In August 2015, the accused moved into the Flat. He purchased groceries for the household and, every two weeks, provided the victim’s mother with an allowance of $150 to $200.
The household was akin to a family, and the accused assumed the role of a father figure to all three children. The accused and the three children did many things together, such as playing, watching television, travelling to Malaysia and going for walks and swims. On occasion, the victim would play with the accused’s head and sit on his stomach when he was lying down.
In March 2016, the accused and the victim’s mother quarrelled. Subsequently, the accused moved out of the Flat. In August 2016, he eventually moved back into the flat. While he lived at the Flat, the accused and the victim’s mother had sexual intercourse about once or twice a week. It was sometime in August 2016 that the facts pertaining to the fourth and seventh charges, as set out below at [12] and [15] respectively, took place.
In December 2016, the victim’s mother stopped having sexual intercourse with the accused because she became more religious. She did not want to have sex until the couple got married. Around the end of February 2017, the accused moved out of the Flat, though he still visited the household occasionally. The facts pertaining to the 23rd charge took place after the accused moved out, sometime on the night of 28 April 2017 (see [18] to [20] below).
The relevant period during which the accused sexually abused the victim in the Flat was between 26 February 2016 and 28 April 2017, a time span of 14 months. During this period, the victim was nine to ten years old. The accused committed the acts at night when the victim’s mother was not beside the victim, who the accused knew slept on the extreme right side of her two siblings. He did so because (a) the victim’s mother did not satisfy his sexual urges, and (b) the victim’s grandmother did not accept him into the family and the accused wanted to get back at her by abusing the victim, who was her grandmother’s favourite grandchild. What follows are the particulars of the three proceeded charges, namely the fourth, the seventh and the 23rd charges.
Facts relevant to the fourth chargeOne night in August 2016, when the victim was ten years old, she was sleeping on a sofa bed in the living room along with her siblings. The accused, who wore only a pair of pants without a top or underwear, and the victim’s mother were sleeping in a bedroom.
Sometime during the night, the accused laid down beside the victim (who was sleeping sideways on the sofa cushions) and pulled her close to him. Covering both the victim and himself with a blanket to conceal his actions, the accused pulled the victim’s shorts and panties down to her thighs, spat saliva on his palm, and rubbed her buttocks and vulva with his fingers. The accused then sexually penetrated the victim’s vagina with his finger without her consent. As a result, the victim felt a sharp pain in her vagina which she had not felt before.
Thereafter, the accused rubbed his erect penis between her anus and vagina for a few minutes. The victim also felt pain. When the accused stopped his actions, the victim pulled her shorts up and washed herself up in the toilet. She continued to feel pain in her vagina.
Facts relevant to the seventh chargeA few weeks later, in the same month of August 2016, the victim, along with her siblings, was in the Flat sleeping on the living room’s sofa cushions. The victim’s mother and the accused, who wore only a pair of pants without a top or underwear, were sleeping in a bedroom.
Sometime during the night, the accused laid down beside the victim and pulled her close to him. Covering both the victim and himself with a blanket to conceal his actions, the accused pulled the victim’s shorts and panties down to her knees, spat saliva on his palm, and rubbed her buttocks and vulva with his fingers. The accused then sexually penetrated the victim’s vagina with his finger without her consent. Consequently, the victim felt a sharp pain in her vagina. Moreover, the victim could not move her body because the accused had grabbed her close to him.
Then, the accused rubbed his erect penis between the victim’s anus and vagina. The victim felt a lot of pain. Once the accused stopped, the victim pulled her shorts up and washed herself in the toilet. After this episode, the victim felt pain when she urinated.
Facts relevant to the 23rd chargeOn 27 April 2017, the victim’s mother, having been hospitalised, entrusted the accused to take care of the victim and her two siblings. On 28 April 2017, the accused fetched the victim from school because she had a fever.
On the night of 28 April 2017, the victim and her siblings were sleeping on a mattress in the Flat’s living room. By the time that the accused returned from visiting the victim’s mother in hospital, the siblings were asleep. At the material time, the accused was wearing only a pair of shorts without a top or underwear.
Sometime later that night, the accused laid beside the victim, who was sleeping sideways on the mattress. He covered both the victim and himself with a blanket to conceal his actions. After pulling the victim’s pants and panties down to her knees, the accused pulled her towards him.
On this occasion, he began by rubbing his erect penis between her anus and vagina. Spitting saliva into his hand, he rubbed the victim’s vulva with his fingers. The victim felt pain. The accused then sexually penetrated the victim’s vagina with his finger without her consent. The victim experienced sharp pain in her vagina.
Subsequent eventsSubsequently, the accused slid his hand into the victim’s bra to squeeze and pinch her breasts. The victim felt pain and tried to pull his hand away, but to no avail. When the accused stopped, the victim pulled her pants and panties up and went to the toilet to wash herself.
On 30 April 2017, the victim’s mother was discharged after being hospitalised for three days.
On 5 May 2017, the victim told her primary school teacher that the accused had touched her private parts. The victim did not want the accused to touch her anymore. She was worried that the accused would use her mother’s illness as an excuse to stay overnight again. Accordingly, the victim’s school alerted the Ministry of Social and Family Development. That same day, the victim’s Child Protection Officer lodged a police report that the victim had been sexually assaulted by the accused. Later that day, the accused was arrested.
Following his arrest, the accused was assessed at the Institute of Mental Health (“IMH”). A report from the IMH dated 1 June 2017 (the “IMH report”) states that the accused had no depressive or psychotic symptoms prior to 27 April 2017. However, the accused was found to have experienced adjustment disorder around that time. The IMH report also states that, at or around the material time, the accused was not of unsound mind and was fit to plead in court.
Decision on convictionThe accused pleaded guilty and admitted to the facts set out in the Statement of Facts without qualification. Accordingly, I convicted the accused on those three charges.
Sentencing Charges taken...To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Public Prosecutor v BUS
...Prosecutor v BMF [2019] SGHC 227 (“BMF”) at [22]). The sentencing bands are as follows (see Pram Nair at [122] and [159]; Public Prosecutor v BMU [2020] SGHC 231 (“BMU”) at [45]): Band Condition Sentencing range 1 Cases with no offence-specific aggravating factors or where the factors are o......