Public Prosecutor v Peh Thian Hui and Another

• Judgment Date: 24 May 2002
• Date: 24 May 2002
• Docket Number: Criminal Case No 29 of 2002
• Court: High Court (Singapore)

Public Prosecutor

Plaintiff

and

Peh Thian Hui and another

Defendant

[2002] SGHC 112

Tay Yong Kwang JC

Criminal Case No 29 of 2002

High Court

Criminal Procedure and Sentencing–Sentencing–Aggravated rape–First accused raping and molesting nine-year-old daughter of second accused–Second accused aware of and consenting to such acts–Second accused aiding and participating in some acts–Mitigating factors–Serious aggravating factors–Need for stiff deterrent sentences

The second accused (“B”) had a daughter, whom the first accused (“Peh”) started raping and molesting when she was just nine years of age. These occurred with B's knowledge and consent, with B even aiding Peh in several of them. The incidents only ended some five years after they started when the victim made a police report.

Peh pleaded guilty to the following: (a) five charges of aggravated rape under s 376 (2) of the Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed) (“PC”) for having non-consensual sexual intercourse with a person under 14 years of age; (b) one charge under s 352 of the PC for using criminal force on the victim; (c) two charges under s 354 of the PC for outrage of modesty; (d) one charge under s 354 of the PC read with s 109 of the PC for abetment of outrage of modesty; and (e) one charge under s 377 of the PC for having carnal intercourse against the order of nature. A further 52 charges were taken into consideration for the purpose of sentencing.

B pleaded guilty to the following: (a) five charges under s 109 of the PC read with s 376 (2) of the PC for abetting Peh by intentionally aiding him in committing aggravated rape on the victim; (b) one charge under s 354 of the PC for outraging the victim's modesty; and (c) one charge under s 30 (2) (a)of the Films Act (Cap 107, 1998 Rev Ed) for possessing 22 obscene films.

The Prosecution pressed for deterrent sentences in view of the aggravating factors, such as the victim's age when she was first raped, the number of occasions of rape, and the indignities the victim suffered in being forced to engage in a threesome with her own mother.

In mitigation, Peh pleaded that he (a) was a first offender, (b) showed his remorse and contrition by pleading guilty, and (c) had a fixation with prepubertal female genitalia due to a childhood sexual experience. Further, he submitted that there was no possibility of such an offence recurring as it was peculiar to his relationship with B.

In mitigation, B pleaded that she (a) was a first offender, (b) had a tragic life and was molested when young, (c) showed her contrition by pleading guilty, and (d) deeply regretted failing her daughter.

Held:

(1) By watching and participating in the rape of her young daughter, B was the very antithesis of a mother and it was an incomprehensible atrocity for her to order her nine-year-old girl to submit to her then 42-year-old lover in such a sordid fashion: at [30] and [31].

(2) Peh's crime of passion was not a one-off occurrence and the rapes once begun became a deadening routine. The submission that he would not reoffend carried little persuasive weight given his psychiatric fixation. Peh and his perversion had to be kept out of society, and out of the victim's life and sight for a very substantial period of time: at [32].

(3) The sentences imposed on Peh were: (a) 12 years' imprisonment and 15 strokes of the cane for each of the five charges under s 376 (2) of the PC; (b) five years' imprisonment for the charge under s 377 of the PC; (c) one years' imprisonment and six strokes of the cane for each of the five charges under s 354 of the PC; (d) six months' imprisonment for the charge under s 354 of the PC read with s 109 of the PC; and (e) three months' imprisonment for the charge under s 352 of the PC. Three of the imprisonment terms for the aggravated rape charges were to run consecutively, making a total of 36 years' imprisonment, with the rest of the sentences to run concurrently. He was also subjected to the maximum 24 strokes of the cane: at [35].

(4) The sentences imposed on B were: (a) 12 years' imprisonment for each of the five charges of abetment of aggravated rape, no caning imposed because of s 231 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 1985 Rev Ed); (b) six months' imprisonment for the charge under s 354 of the PC; and (c) four months' imprisonment for the Films Act charge. Three of the imprisonment terms for the abetment of aggravated rape charges were to run consecutively, making a total of 36 years' imprisonment, with the rest of the sentences to run concurrently: at [35].

Chia Kim Heng Frederick v PP [1992] 1 SLR (R) 63; [1992] 1 SLR 361 (refd)

PP v MU [1999] SGHC 107 (refd)

PP v B [1999] 3 SLR (R) 227; [1999] 4 SLR 257 (refd)

Films Act (Cap 107, 1998 Rev Ed) s 30 (2) (a)

Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed) ss 109, 352, 354, 376 (1), 376 (2), 377

Ravneet Kaur and Francis Ng (Attorney-General's Chambers) for the Prosecution

Kertar...