Public Prosecutor v Tan Bing Ren
| Jurisdiction | Singapore |
| Judge | Ow Yong Tuck Leong |
| Judgment Date | 11 April 2017 |
| Neutral Citation | [2017] SGDC 105 |
| Court | District Court (Singapore) |
| Docket Number | DAC-939180-2016, DAC 939182-2016 and DAC-939184-2016, Magistrate’s Appeal No. 9105/2017/01 |
| Published date | 13 April 2017 |
| Year | 2017 |
| Hearing Date | 14 March 2017,07 April 2017,22 February 2017 |
| Plaintiff Counsel | DPP Mansoor Amir |
| Defendant Counsel | Sinnadurai s/o T Maniam (Regent Law LLC) |
| Citation | [2017] SGDC 105 |
The Straits Times newspapers reported on 3 March 2017 that the latest public perception survey showed that the public holds the police force in high regard. Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam said during the Budget Committee of Supply 2017 debate, “We were again ranked first in Gallup’s Law and Order 2016 Report. That report studied the public’s sense of safety and the public’s confidence in the police force… All of this reflects the extraordinary level of faith and trust Singaporeans have in the police force”.
Unfortunately, this was not the case for the victim, Tjang Siang Le, an 84 year old retiree who lived alone with her maid. On 24 November 2015, the victim called the police for help, saying that someone had stolen money from her home. She opened the door of her home for the policemen who responded to her call for help. She opened her safe to show her valuables to the police. The accused, a police national serviceman holding the rank of Special Constabulary Sergeant, after entering her home and in the midst of the police investigations, proceeded to steal a gold bar from her, and pawned the gold bar for money. That same policeman subsequently hatched a plan to return to her home, and stole 2 more gold bars from the victim.
The Charges The accused is a 22-year old male. He pleaded guilty and was convicted of 2 charges (1
First Information Report
On 30 November 2015, at 8.51pm, the police received a call with the following message: “This morning about 11am, one person, a Chinese man in his 30s in police uniform asked me to open up my safe as I was told someone is going to steal from me. Subsequently the person took all my cash and gold from the safe and left. My maid was at home and had witnessed it. I’m 80 plus year old”. The incident location was given as the victim’s home at Waterloo Street.
Facts relating to the 1st charge (DAC-939180-2016)
Investigations revealed that on 24 November 2015, the accused reported for his morning shift duty. He was deployed to perform Fast Response Car duties together with his colleague, SGT Muhammad Shammer bin Mohamed Hasssan (“SGT Shammer”). The accused was in his full police uniform and armed with his police weapon at the time.
On the same day, at about 10.30am, the police received a call with the following message: “Someone steal money here”. The incident location was given as the victim’s home. The accused and SGT Shammer, were despatched to attend to this incident. When they arrived, the victim informed them that her maid had allegedly stolen money from her safe. The victim then brought them into her room and showed them where she kept her money. The money was kept in a safe which was kept inside her cupboard. The safe was secured by a number lock.
The victim then took out most of the items that she had inside the safe and placed them on her bed. These were a bank book, some documents and jewellery, which included four gold bars. One of the gold bars was placed near the accused’s file. When SGT Shammer was otherwise engaged referring the case to the Investigating Officer (“IO”) and when the victim was distracted looking at other items, the accused took the gold bar and placed it in his police pants.
The accused and SGT Shammer left the unit and resumed their patrol duties after the IO arrived at about 12pm. Their patrol duties ended later that day at about 10pm. During this entire time, the gold bar remained in the accused’s pocket. After his duty ended, the accused brought the gold bar back with him.
On 26 November 2015, the accused went to a Value Max Pawnshop where he sold the gold bar for $4,600. The accused was given a receipt which he threw away in a nearby dustbin.
Investigations revealed that the accused invested in stocks sometime in early 2015. He lost about $20,000 at one point and borrowed $2,000 from his friend, one Neo Chong En, Hubert, to repay the bank. On 26 November 2015, sometime in the evening, after selling the gold bar, the accused repaid Hubert the $2,000 which he had borrowed. The rest of the money was spent on food and beverages.
The $2000 has been recovered from Hubert. The gold bar has also been recovered from the pawnshop by the police.
Facts relating to 3rd charge (DAC-939184-2016)
Investigations revealed that on 27 November 2015, the accused called the victim’s nephew, one Tan Kim Hai, to ask for the victim’s home number. The accused informed Kim Hai that he wanted to pay a visit to the victim to find out how she was doing. Kim Hai then gave the accused the victim’s home number.
Subsequently, on 29 November 2015, the accused called the victim at her home to ask if he could pay her a visit as he needed to discuss the installation of CCTV cameras in the unit with her. This was a ruse and the accused, in fact, wanted to visit the victim so that he could steal more gold bars. On that day, however, the victim was not available to meet with the accused as she had to go to church.
On 30 November 2015, sometime in the morning, after his night shift had ended, the accused called the victim once more asking if he could pay her a visit. The victim agreed.
The accused arrived at the victim’s home that same morning. He was wearing a jacket which had the police logo on it, police pants and black Camper sneakers at the time. The victim invited him in. They first had a chat in the living room. During this chat, the accused informed the victim that he was poor which was why he was working as a police officer. After a while, the accused asked the victim to show him her valuables as he wanted to make sure everything was in order.
The victim, trusting the accused, led him to her room and opened the safe for him. She then took out her valuables, which included three gold bars, and laid them out on her bed for the accused’s inspection. When the victim was distracted, the accused stole two of the gold bars and placed them in his pocket.
The victim subsequently returned her valuables to the safe. The accused and the victim thereafter returned to the living room to talk. A short while later, the accused left the unit with the two gold bars. The two gold bars are valued at about S$4,600 each, with a total value of about S$9,200.
Later that day, the victim began to feel uneasy as she recalled her conversation with the accused in which he had shared that he was poor. She checked her safe and discovered that three gold bars were missing. She then called the police.
Investigations revealed that the accused had previously borrowed $4,700 from one Ng Shen Yao, who was a friend’s friend. He had taken this loan as he needed money to cover the...
To continue reading
Request your trial