Public Prosecutor v Chan Teck Suan and Another

JurisdictionSingapore
JudgeJill Tan Li Ching
Judgment Date03 December 2008
Neutral Citation[2008] SGDC 362
Published date16 December 2008
CourtDistrict Court (Singapore)
Plaintiff CounselTan Kiat Pheng & Karen Ang (Deputy Public Prosecutors)
Defendant CounselTan Cheow Hung (Keystone Law Corporation),SS Dhillon (Dhillon & Partners)

3 December 2008

Oral Judgment

District Judge Jill Tan:

Facts

1 The two accused persons, Chan Teck Suan and Ang Yong Meng Ricky, met the victim RP and her boyfriend for the first time on 21 September 2007 at a party in a mutual friend’s flat. During the course of the evening, they all consumed alcohol. They also played card games which required the loser to drink hard liquor. The victim lost the most number of games and thus drank the most liquor. She was not a frequent drinker and had become very drunk by about 3 am on 22 September 2007. At her boyfriend’s advice, she did not go home that night but instead slept on a bed in the room where the card games had been played.

2 At about 4 am, the two accused persons went back to that same room. Ang closed the door, and kissed the sleeping victim. He then locked the door, touched the victim’s left breast, moved to her legs, lifted her dress, removed her panties, then raped her. At the time Ang moved towards the victim’s legs, Chan moved to kiss the victim’s lips. Chan then put his hands underneath the victim’s bra, to touch her breasts and nipples. The victim awoke during this time and was aware of what was happening, but was too sleepy and tired to either resist or shout for help.

3 After a while, Chan stopped what he was doing, and told Ang to stop as well. They then left the flat. Later, when the victim awoke, she raised the alarm and was brought to the police. Swabs taken from the victim’s vagina, urethra and panties were sperm-positive and contained DNA materials belonging to Ang.

4 In the subsequent days, Ang and Chan made contact with the victim through the host of the party, and asked the victim to withdraw her complaint against them. Ang even told the victim that the only way to “settle” the matter was for the victim to say that she had consented to their acts. The victim’s friend, who was present, intervened, and the police, who had been called in by the victim’s boyfriend, moved in and arrested the two accused persons.

5 Ang pleaded guilty to raping the victim under section 376(1) of the Penal Code (Chapter 224). He consented to be tried in the Subordinate Courts and thus faces an imprisonment term of up to 7 years and is also liable to a fine or caning. Chan pleaded guilty to using criminal force on the victim by kissing her lips and touching her breasts and nipples, knowing that it was likely to outrage her modesty. Under section 354 of the Penal Code, he faces up to two years’ imprisonment, or a fine, or caning, or any two of these punishments.

Mitigation

6 Both accused persons were 21 years old at the time of their offences and are now 22 years old. They are first offenders. Both were under the influence of alcohol at the material time. They had returned to the room in search of the earpiece for Ang’s handphone before going home.

7 In mitigation, Chan was said to have been “overcome by an irresistible impulse” to kiss the victim when he saw her sleeping in the room. He kissed her and got excited when she kissed him back. He later realised that she must have mistaken him for her boyfriend, as she would otherwise not have reacted in that manner. He accepted that she had not consented to his acts. Counsel stressed repeatedly that Chan should be given credit for not only voluntarily stopping his molest of the victim, but also for stopping Ang from further raping her. Counsel submitted that this should earn Chan a sentence below the benchmark, and one without caning.

8 Chan lost his father when he was nine years old, and has a 68-year-old mother to take care of. He is pursuing a course at the Institute of Technical Education, and is expected to complete it in March 2009. Counsel sought a deferment of Chan’s sentence to allow him to complete his course of study.

9 As for Ang, it was stated in his mitigation plea that while searching for his earpiece, he caught sight of the victim’s underwear, and became excited. He kissed her, and when she did not resist, he became more excited and thus proceeded to commit the acts stated above. It was also contended that he could not fully-penetrate the victim as he was not fully erect due to his drunken state. After he stopped the act, he panicked and thus left the flat with Chan. Counsel added that it was a manifestation of Ang’s remorse that instead of running away after committing the offences, he made contact with the victim and apologized profusely to her for his actions. It was also stressed that this was not a premeditated rape, but an act committed by a man overcome by his hormones.

10 Ang is married with two young children, aged four and two. At the time of the offence, he was already married and his wife was pregnant. It was contended that there is no risk of him re-offending.

Submissions on Sentence

11 The prosecution highlighted the case of Chia Kim Heng Frederick v PP [1992] 1 SLR 361, which essentially held that ten years’ imprisonment should be taken as the starting point for the punishment for...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT