Public Prosecutor v Wang Zhijian

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Chan Seng Onn J
• Judgment Date: 30 November 2012
• Neutral Citation: [2012] SGHC 238
• Court: High Court (Singapore)
• Hearing Date: 27 April 2012,26 April 2012,23 November 2011,31 July 2012,23 May 2012,02 May 2012,25 April 2012,24 April 2012,22 November 2011,23 April 2012,02 December 2011,24 November 2011
• Docket Number: Criminal Case No 3 of 2011
• Plaintiff Counsel: Hay Hung Chun, Mohamed Faizal, Charlene Tay Chia and Eunice Chong (Attorney-General's Chambers)
• Defendant Counsel: Kelvin Lim Phuan Foo (Kelvin Lim & Partners) and Jason Peter Dendroff (JP Dendroff & Co)
• Subject Matter: Criminal law,offences,murder,special exceptions,diminished responsibility
• Published date: 11 December 2012

Chan Seng Onn J: Introduction

The accused, Wang Zhijian (“Wang”), is a 46 year-old male Chinese national who faced the following four charges:

That you, WANG ZHIJIAN,

1ST CHARGE (“the First Charge”)

Sometime between 11.00 pm on the 18th day of September 2008 and 12.49 am on the 19th day of September 2008, at Block [XX] Yishun Avenue 11 #[YY]–[ZZ], Singapore, did commit murder by causing the death of one ZHANG MENG (Female/Date of Birth: 13 November 1966), and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under section 302 of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.

2ND CHARGE (“the Second Charge”)

Sometime between 11.00 pm on the 18th day of September 2008 and 12.49 am on the 19th day of September 2008, at Block [XX] Yishun Avenue 11 #[YY]–[ZZ], Singapore, did commit murder by causing the death of one FENG JIANYU (Female/Date of Birth: 23 August 1991), and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under section 302 of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.

3RD CHARGE (“the Third Charge”)

Sometime between 11.00 pm on the 18th day of September 2008 and 1.15 am on the 19th day of September 2008, at Block [XX] Yishun Avenue 11 #[YY]–[ZZ], Singapore, did attempt to murder one LI MEILIN (Female/Date of Birth 10 February 1993), to wit, by slashing and stabbing her repeatedly with knives at various parts of her body including on her neck, lower back and face, with the intention of causing death to the said Li Meilin, and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under section 307(1) of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.

4TH CHARGE (“the Fourth Charge”)

Sometime between 11.00 pm on the 18th day of September 2008 and 12.49 am on the 19th day of September 2008, at Block [XX] Yishun Avenue 11 #[YY]–[ZZ], Singapore, did commit murder by causing the death of one YANG JIE (Female/Date of Birth: 3 April 1972), and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under section 302 of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.

The Prosecution stood down the Third Charge for attempted murder and proceeded with the First, Second and Fourth Charges (“the murder charges”). The trial lasted 10 days and took place over three tranches. Although it was not specified in the murder charges, the Prosecution clarified that they were proceeding under limb (a) of s 300 of the Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed), which states: Murder 300. Except in the cases hereinafter excepted culpable homicide is murder — (a) if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death;

...

[emphasis added]

At the close of the Prosecution’s case, I was satisfied that there was some evidence which is not inherently incredible and which satisfies each and every element of the charges as framed by the Prosecution. I therefore called upon Wang to give his defence and he elected to take the stand and give evidence. Wang admitted that he committed the acts that caused the death of Zhang Meng (“Zhang”) and Feng Jianyu (“Feng”). However, Wang did not admit that he caused the injuries found on the fingers of Yang Jie (“Yang”). There was also some dispute as to the sequence of events leading to the death of Yang. The Defence relied exclusively on the defence of diminished responsibility found at Exception 7 to s 300 of the Penal Code, which states:

Exception 7.—Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender was suffering from such abnormality of mind (whether arising from a condition of arrested or retarded development of mind or any inherent causes or induced by disease or injury) as substantially impaired his mental responsibility for his acts and omissions in causing the death or being a party to causing the death.

[emphasis added]

Unusually, the Prosecution’s and Defence’s psychiatric experts both agreed that Wang was suffering from a medical condition known as “adjustment disorder”. However, both experts disagreed on whether the Wang’s adjustment disorder had substantially impaired his mental responsibility at time of committing the offences. The trial before me essentially involved three issues: whether the elements of murder under s 300(a) of the Penal Code were satisfied in relation to Wang’s attack on Zhang, Feng and Yang; what was Wang’s state of mind when he killed each victim; and whether Wang qualifies for the defence of diminished responsibility by virtue of his adjustment disorder for each of the killings?

I shall first set out the undisputed facts. Next, I will evaluate the disputed evidence and make the necessary findings. Based on my findings, I shall then determine Wang’s state of mind when he killed each victim. Finally, if I am of the view that Wang is guilty of an offence under s 300(a) of the Penal Code, I will evaluate the relevant evidence and in particular the experts’ evidence in order to determine whether or not Wang qualifies for the defence of diminished responsibility.

The facts constituting the offence Background

The background of the parties is not in dispute and can be stated briefly. Wang met Zhang in China in 2005, where they began a romantic relationship. In 2007, Zhang’s daughter, Feng, came to Singapore to study. Zhang came to Singapore with Feng and rented two bedrooms in a flat at Yishun Avenue 11 (“the Flat”). Zhang stayed in one of the bedrooms (“Bedroom 1”) of the Flat, while Feng stayed in another bedroom (“Bedroom 3”). The two tenants staying in the remaining bedroom in the Flat (“Bedroom 2”) were Yang, and her daughter Li Meilin (“Li”). Zhang, Feng, Yang and Li were Chinese nationals. Li attended the same school in Singapore as Feng. Yang and Li were not related to Wang and Zhang.

Wang’s undisputed evidence was that he had a troubled history with Zhang and her family. After Zhang’s family members found out about his relationship with Zhang, they objected to the relationship. Some of Zhang’s family members went to Wang’s home and his workplace to harass him, in order to force him to leave Zhang. To avoid the repeated harassment, Wang had to change his place of residence frequently and was unable to continue working as a result. Wang chose to retire early, and he received about RMB 400,000 as retirement funds.

Wang maintained that he continued to love Zhang deeply despite her family members’ objections, and Zhang had loved him in return. Wang stated in court that Zhang was an emotional person. Zhang had allegedly attempted suicide when Wang tried to break up with her in September 2006. Wang also stated that Zhang was difficult to maintain because she led a lavish lifestyle. Even before Wang came to Singapore, his retirement funds were quickly depleted to RMB 50,000 through Zhang’s expenditure and losses in the stock market. Wang’s explanation and description of the tattoos on his body in his statement recorded by the police pursuant to s 121 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 1985 Rev Ed) (“Long Statement”) on 2 October 2008 offered a glimpse into his extremely complicated relationship with Zhang:

Sometime in the beginning of May 2007, I had my first tattoo at my back. I tattooed Zhang Meng’s face and half-body on my back and a rose at the bottom. I did it to express my sincere love for Zhang Meng. I tattooed a snake on my left shoulder, while a skeleton and heart on my right shoulder. The snake symbolizes the viciousness of Zhang Meng. The skeleton resembled the “dead god” slowly and gradually swallow[ing] my heart, and the “dead god” referred to Zhang Meng.

In November 2007, Feng secured a place in a secondary school in Singapore. Zhang decided to accompany her daughter to Singapore. Zhang suggested that Wang should come to Singapore to be with her, and promised to help him find work. In that way, they could be together far away from her family members. Before Zhang’s death, Wang came to Singapore three times to be with Zhang. Wang’s third visit to Singapore was on 9 September 2008. During this visit, he stayed with Zhang in Bedroom 1 of the Flat until her death nine days later on 18 September 2008.

Zhang’s bizarre treatment of Wang

Wang’s evidence was that he was subjected to rather bizarre treatment by Zhang during his visits to Singapore. Apparently, Zhang did not allow Wang to leave Bedroom 1 and insisted that Wang had to remain in Bedroom 1 naked. As a result, Wang had to urinate and defecate into plastic bags in Bedroom 1 because the room did not have an attached toilet. Zhang also prohibited Wang from interacting with anybody else in the Flat or leaving Bedroom 1 to use the toilet in the kitchen. Wang stated in his Long Statement recorded on 25 September 2008 that: 46. During my second trip to Singapore, … Zhang Meng disallowed me to leave my bedroom. She did not want me to meet the tenants. I suspected Zhang Meng did not want the tenants to know our relationship. Jianyu disliked me and Zhang Meng told me to stay in the bedroom most of the time. … There were two main reasons [why] Zhang Meng prohibited me from leaving the room whenever the tenants and Jianyu were in the house. The first reason being Jianyu disliked me, secondly Zhang Meng did not want me to see or talk to the tenant Yang Jie. I felt myself confined in that bedroom. She controlled all my movement. I felt I was being suppressed.

Wang gave further details of Zhang’s bizarre treatment of him by stating in his Long Statement recorded on 2 October 2008 that: 62. I also want to add when I stayed in my bedroom, on several occasions, I passed motion and urinated inside the bedroom since Zhang Meng did not like me to go out when [Feng] and the other two tenants were in the house. I would dispose my faeces and urine wrapped in newspaper and plastic bags when [Feng] and the two tenants left the house.

The Prosecution did not dispute this aspect of Wang’s evidence. In fact, Li, who appeared as the Prosecution’s witness, testified in court that Wang rarely walked around the Flat, and each time she saw Wang, he kept his head down without ever...