Public Prosecutor v Wang Wenfeng

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Lee Seiu Kin J
• Judgment Date: 20 September 2011
• Neutral Citation: [2011] SGHC 208
• Court: High Court (Singapore)
• Docket Number: Criminal Case No 4 of 2011
• Published date: 09 April 2013
• Year: 2011
• Hearing Date: 15 March 2011,11 March 2011,08 March 2011,17 March 2011,16 March 2011,25 April 2011,10 March 2011,07 March 2011,14 March 2011,23 March 2011,24 March 2011
• Plaintiff Counsel: Eugene Lee, Lin Yinbing and Ilona Tan (Attorney-General's Chambers)
• Defendant Counsel: Cheong Aik Chye (A C Cheong & Co) and Chong Thiam Choy (Loo & Chong)
• Citation: [2011] SGHC 208

Lee Seiu Kin J: Introduction

The deceased, Yuen Swee Hong, had been driving taxis for a living for some 20 years. He lived in a Housing Development Board flat at Serangoon Avenue 4 with his wife, PW8 Chan Oi Lin (“Chan”), a son in national service and a daughter of school-going age. The deceased’s aged mother also lived with them. Chan worked as a receptionist. Until 11 April 2009, the deceased’s family was a picture of domestic normalcy, no different from thousands of families in Singapore. On that day, their lives changed dramatically.

Evidence of Chan

11 April 2009 was the Saturday following the Good Friday public holiday of that year. The deceased, who drove the night shift, had left home at about 10.30pm the previous night. He would usually get home by 8.00am. But that morning, when he did not turn up by 8.15am, Chan called him on his mobile phone while she was travelling to work. Her call was not answered. She tried again about half an hour later, but it was also not answered. By then Chan had arrived at her office. She placed her phone in the drawer of her desk and went to the toilet. When she returned, she saw that there was a missed call alert on her phone. The call was made from the deceased’s phone. She immediately returned the call but it was answered by an unfamiliar male voice who spoke in Mandarin with what Chan described as a “mainland Chinese” accent. This was Chan’s account of the conversation at paras 5–6 of her cautioned statement: 5 The man said to me in Mandarin, ‘he left his phone here you come and collect”. I asked where I could collect the mobile phone. The man then asked who I was. I responded that I was the wife ... At this, the male voice raised his tone and said ‘he is going to die’. He also said ‘he is now in my hand’. When I heard this, I became alarmed at the thought of the deceased in danger. The male voice demanded a sum of S$150,000 to secure the release of the deceased. I tried negotiating with him by saying that I did not have so much money. The man warned me not to tell anyone about the call or to alert the Police. He then terminated the call. 6 I called the deceased’s mobile phone again and the same male voice answered my call. I pleaded with him to let my husband go and said that I did not have money. The man told me to look for the money. I asked him to allow me to speak to the deceased but he did not reply. I then asked how he was sure that the person he had was the deceased. The man replied that the deceased was wearing a white top, skinny in built and drove a taxi. When I heard his description, I realised that his claims were genuine and I pleaded with him not to harm the deceased. I told him again that I did not have money. The man told me to look for money and terminated the call.

Chan then contacted her daughter and the deceased’s sister before leaving her workplace. She reached home at about 10.00am. Her children, along with the deceased’s brother, Yuen Peng Yin (“Yuen”) were already there. They decided to call the police and shortly thereafter some officers arrived. At about 11.00am, Chan received a call on her phone from the deceased’s phone. The same male voice was on the line. He asked Chan if she had the money. Under the direction of one of the police officers, Chan said that she had $80,000. The male caller told her to deliver the money to Sengkang Mass Rapid Transit (“MRT”) station by 3.00pm. He then ended the call. At about 3.00pm Chan received another call from the deceased’s phone. It was the same male caller. Chan told him that her relatives from Malaysia were coming with the money and she required time. She said that she managed to raise $5,000 and pleaded with him to release the deceased. The male caller asked if she had contacted the police and Chan lied that she had not. He said that he would call again the following day.

On Sunday 12 April 2009, at about 10.00am, the call came from the same male caller. He asked Chan how much money she had and she replied she only had $5,000. He told her to deliver the money to him at Marsiling MRT station within 30 minutes. Chan pleaded for more time as she had to make her way there. He agreed to 12 noon. Chan left home with Yuen who drove her there. She tried to call the deceased’s phone to tell the male caller that she would be late. However he had turned off the phone and her calls were diverted to the voicemail service. At about 1.00pm, the male caller called and asked if she had arrived. Chan said that she had taken a wrong turn and would arrive in 30 minutes. He terminated the call abruptly. She finally arrived at Marsiling MRT station just before 2.00pm but there was no call from him until 3.00pm. However although she could hear it was the same male voice, she could not make out what he said as the place was noisy. Before she could move to a quieter location the line was cut off. Chan sat at the bus stop to await his call. After about ten minutes, she received a short messaging service text (“SMS”) from the deceased’s phone. It was in Chinese and translates as “China Construction Bank Fujian Branch: Wu Wenhong: [xxx]”. Then her phone rang. It was not a call from the deceased’s number but from a private line. It was the same male caller. He instructed Chan to remit the money to the account number he had just provided by SMS. He then hung up. Chan discussed this with Yuen and decided not to comply with the male caller’s instructions, feeling that he would not release her husband in any event. She sent him an SMS in English asking to first hear her husband’s voice before transferring the money. There was no reply. About half an hour later, she received a call from the male caller who asked if she had remitted the money. Chan replied that she did not know how to do it and asked to meet him. According to Chan, his reply in Mandarin (as translated by Chan) was: ‘your husband has not eaten any food for two days, he has bled a lot and still you are not remitting the money’. He then ended the call. Chan and Yuen remained at Marsiling MRT station for several hours; they left at 10.30pm. Just as she arrived home, Chan received a call from the male caller using the deceased’s phone. He again asked if she had remitted the money and Chan repeated that she did not know how to do it. The male caller said that he did not care and ended the call abruptly. That was the last time Chan heard from him.

Police action

At 9.52am on 11 April 2009, the police received the report that the deceased had been kidnapped. They swung into action. Officers were despatched to Chan’s home to assist her in dealing with the person making the calls to her. A check was made with the taxi company on whether its global positioning system (“GPS”) could locate the deceased’s taxi. The information obtained enabled the police to narrow their search to the vicinity of the last reported location of the taxi. Assistant Superintendent of Police Daniel Wong (“ASP Daniel Wong”) took charge of the investigation at 12.35pm. At 11.35pm that night, the taxi was found at a multi-storey car park at Canberra Road. It was parked at Deck 5B which was one level below the top deck. External inspection was conducted by Assistant Superintendent of Police Christopher Jacob (“ASP Jacob”) and Assistant Superintendent of Police Kelvin Kwok (“ASP Kwok”). They observed that the engine was turned off but the fare meter was still running. There was blood in the cabin and the interior appeared to be ransacked. They also saw a left shoe on the floor mat of the driver’s seat. At 12.15am on 12 April 2009, they handed the taxi to an ambush team to keep discreet observation in case the culprit returned to the taxi. By 5.30am there was no sign of anybody going up to the taxi and ASP Jacob and ASP Kwok returned and searched the vicinity of the taxi for clues. The taxi was towed to the Police Cantonment Complex (“PCC”) just past midnight on 14 April 2009. There, Senior Station Inspector 2 Colin Han (“SSI2 Colin Han”) took custody of it and placed it in the basement of the PCC where it was secured by a roller shutter. At 4.10am ASP Wong took possession of the taxi and its keys from SSI2 Colin Han.

On 13 April 2009, at about 1.00pm, the accused, Wang Wenfang (“the Accused”), was arrested outside a third level unit at People’s Park Complex. He was brought to the Criminal Investigation Department (“CID”) (located at the PCC) and his interrogation began. That night, the Accused was brought to his rented room at 7A Jalan Legundi. The police searched it and seized a number of items. He was brought back to CID for further questioning. Over the next two days the police brought the Accused to Beach Road in the vicinity of Middle Road to point out where he had found the deceased’s mobile phone as he claimed. He was then brought to Beach Road, opposite The Gateway, which was where he claimed he had called Chan from. He then showed the police the bus stop at Beach Road from which he had boarded the bus to Geylang. They moved on to a 7-Eleven store at Geylang Road where the Accused said he had thrown away the deceased’s mobile phone. The Accused would subsequently admit that he had made up these matters and had led the police on a bit of a wild goose chase.

On 17 April 2009, at about 4.20pm, ASP Wong asked the Accused, through a Chinese interpreter, if he was willing to show where he had disposed of the deceased’s body. According to ASP Wong, the Accused told him that the body was at Sembawang and he agreed to lead them there. At about 4.25pm, ASP Wong took the Accused out in a car with the interpreter and three other police officers and they headed for Sembawang Road. At Sembawang Road near Jalan Legundi, the Accused directed the police officers towards Sembawang Park, turning into Andrew Avenue, then into Jalan Inggu before arriving at a dead end road at the end of Jalan Selimang. They got out of the car and ASP Wong asked the Accused, through the...