Public Prosecutor v Velda Lim Ming

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Tan Jen Tse
• Judgment Date: 26 July 2022
• Neutral Citation: [2022] SGMC 42
• Court: Magistrates' Court (Singapore)
• Hearing Date: 24 January 2022,25 January 2022,29 March 2022,05 April 2022,26 April 2022
• Docket Number: MCN-900148-2020 & Anor, Magistrate’s Appeal No. 9080-2022-01
• Plaintiff Counsel: DPPs Melissa Lee and Christopher Ong
• Defendant Counsel: Balachandran Suren Jaesh (Bishop Law Corporation)
• Subject Matter: Criminal Law,Providing false information to public servant
• Published date: 02 August 2022

District Judge Tan Jen Tse: Introduction

The accused, Velda Lim Ming, female, aged 28 years, was convicted after trial on two counts of providing false information to the police. She was sentenced to concurrent sentences of 10 weeks’ imprisonment per charge. She has filed an appeal against conviction and sentence and has been released on bail pending appeal.

The charges

The charges were as follows:-

MCN-900148-2020 (Amended 1st charge)

are charged that, on 27 May 2019, in Singapore, did provide information to a public servant, to wit, you sent a message to a police officer via the “SPF Feedback” facility, stating that you knew that one Dawson Chng and one of his friends were engaged in the import and sale of illegal weapons, which information you knew to be false, intending thereby to cause such public servant to use his lawful power to the annoyance of Dawson Chng, and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 182 of the Penal Code (Cap. 224, Rev. Ed. 2008).

MCN-900149-2020 (Amended 2nd charge)

are charged that you, on 28 May 2019, in Singapore, did provide information to a public servant, to wit, you sent a message to a police officer via the “SPF Feedback” facility, stating that you knew that one Dawson Chng was selling illegal weapons, which information you knew to be false, intending thereby to cause such public servant to use his lawful power to the annoyance of Dawson Chng, and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 182 of the Penal Code (Cap. 224, Rev. Ed. 2008).

Background facts

At the time of the offences, the accused was in a relationship with Dawson Chng Jie Sheng (“Dawson”) (PW3). One of Dawson’s friends was Tan Shen Kang Melvin (“Melvin”) (PW4). The information which the accused provided to the police was in relation to them.

The accused’s relationship with Dawson was volatile. According to Dawson, it was unstable and complicated, as both of them were “very easy jealous kind of person”. There were a lot of arguments over friends of the opposite sex.¹ The accused described the relationship as “very toxic”. She stated that the parties were very insecure towards each other and argued every day. There was jealousy over third parties and physical fights.²

At the time of the offences, the accused was jealous that Dawson had gone to Bangkok with her former friend, Jocelyn. She was angry and decided to make a police report against him.

She created a new email XXX@gmail.com (“the email account”) which she used when she provided information via the Singapore Police Force (“SPF”) feedback facility on 27 May 2019 (Exhibit P2). She informed the police that:-

I believe that this person, Dawson Chng, has unauthorized armory located at his house or being placed at one of his friends house. I have a screenshot of him telling me that he has possession of a gun and I know that he and one of his friends has been bringing in illegal weapons and then selling them to others. They are a danger to the community and spreading that danger along with them. Furthermore, he is known to have done other illegal traits in SG and in MSIA with some of his friends that are on the run from the police. Please look him up to prevent such dangers in our community. His address: Clementi West [full address redacted] His friend’s address, that does illegal weapon sales: Clementi Ave [full address redacted].

To support her claims, the accused attached a screenshot of four old messages which Dawson had sent to her via Telegram messaging in December 2018, about five months earlier. These stated, “I give u”, “You want”, “No bullet” and “I got one pistol” (“the pistol messages”).

The accused did not disclose her name when providing the information. Instead, she falsely stated that the informant was “Dawson Chng” and provided his NRIC number. She used the Safari incognito mode, so that what she did would not show up in her browser history.

She followed up the next day (28 May 2019) as she perceived a lack of urgency by the police. She used the same e-mail account to provide further information through the SPF feedback facility (Exhibit P3):-

A few days ago, I’ve submitted a report on this person: Dawson Chng Jie Sheng, of having illegal weapons based at his home in Clementi West [full address redacted], however nothing has been done as of now. Furthermore, the police is letting such a dangerous person roam around freely in this country? He has been selling off illegal weapons to the people who contacted him, and has been doing other illegal activities but nothing has been done unto him? From what I’ve known is that he got all these weapons from one of his friends which I’ve previously submitted in the report. He carries 3 phones with him and he is currently in Malaysia now with his friends. Please do something about it and keep our community safe from these dangerous people whom was not authorized to keep weapons at home or with them.

Once again, she failed to disclose her name. She falsely stated that the informant was “Dawson Chng” and misused his NRIC number. She attached a screenshot of the pistol messages. As before, she used Safari incognito.

On 31 May 2019, SI Sim Jia Hui (PW1) of Clementi Police Division was notified of the information contained in Exhibits P2 and P3. After preliminary investigations, she decided to conduct a raid. The raiding party consisted of a large group of about 20 officers as it was alleged that firearms were involved. They began a stakeout at around 3.00 p.m. near Dawson’s unit and detained him when he returned at about 6.00 p.m.. Dawson denied possessing illegal weapons or firearms. The police searched his car and unit. No weapons or anything incriminating were found. Dawson was not arrested but was brought back to the police station for an interview.³

On 7 June 2019, a party of about five police officers conducted a raid on Melvin’s residence. No illegal weapons or firearms were found there either. Melvin was not arrested, nor was he brought back to the police station.⁴

During their investigations, the police established that Exhibits P2 and P3 originated from the accused.⁵ They seized her mobile phone. Messages exchanged via Telegram by the accused and Dawson between 25 May to 28 May 2019 (Exhibit P4) were recovered. In summary, Exhibit P4 showed that the accused was angry with Dawson for going to Bangkok with Jocelyn and other friends, and repeatedly threatened to report him to the police.

The prosecution’s case Dawson’s evidence

Dawson testified that the information contained in Exhibits P2 and P3 were untrue. Neither he or any of his friends brought in weapons and sold them.⁶ He never had a pistol or weapons of any kind and the accused had never seen him with these.⁷ Nor did the accused ever see Melvin and him playing with weapons or being in possession of them. He never discussed anything relating to weapons with Melvin in the presence of the accused.⁸

He sent the pistol messages to the accused as they were quarrelling “over a guy” and he wanted to annoy or irritate her. He felt that when she was angry, “the only way that she will get annoyed or irritated is me doing like a stupid or funny things”. This was a joke. He also sent her a picture of him holding a toy gun which he referred to as a “nerf gun”.⁹

Dawson testified that he did not know that the accused had made a police report. He was caught off-guard by the police raid. After he parked his car, he waited for the lift. When the lift door opened, the officers pinned him to the lift. They asked if he had anything to declare and he said no. They searched his car and took his handphone to check if he had done anything illegal. They then raided his unit.¹⁰

Melvin’s evidence

Melvin testified that the contents of Exhibits P2 and P3 were false. He never brought in illegal weapons with Dawson or sold them. He never supplied weapons to Dawson. He never spoke to Dawson about weapons when the accused was present, nor did he possess any weapons. He never spoke to the accused about weapons, nor did he show her any weapons.¹¹

The case for the defence The accused’s evidence

In her defence, the accused testified that Dawson had done illegal things on four occasions. On one occasion at Club Envy at “St James Power House” (“the Club Envy incident”), she was with Joselyn (who was then her friend) and another friend, Winnie. She approached some male friends, took a selfie with one of them and had a drink with him. Dawson became jealous. He took out a knife from his pants and wanted to hurt her friend “Benjie”. She sat on top of Dawson to stop him from doing so.¹²

The accused claimed that on another occasion when they were at Melvin’s unit, Dawson and Melvin played with a metal baton which featured a concealed knife. When they were leaving, she saw Melvin pass a plastic bag containing five or six boxes of brass knuckles and the baton to Dawson.¹³

On the third occasion, the accused claimed that she accompanied Dawson when he sold a set of brass knuckles which he had obtained from Melvin. He picked her up from her home on his motorcycle and went to a car park at Clementi. He then passed a plastic bag with a box to a male person, who opened the box and took out the brass knuckles. This was how she knew that the plastic bag Melvin handed to Dawson contained brass knuckles and that Dawson was selling weapons.¹⁴

The fourth time Dawson did something illegal was when his friend Daryl was caught by the police (“the Daryl incident”). He was afraid that Daryl would “rat him out”. He then went to buy a new phone with a pre-paid card and sent messages to her. He wondered if he should remove the items from his place as Daryl knew of them. He asked the accused if he could leave the items with her and she said, “Oh, then why not put at my place.”¹⁵

She further testified that when she submitted the information contained in Exhibits P2...