SINGAPORE: A boy who had tried to rape his sister when she was 11 and he was 14 has been sentenced to 27 months’ probation.
The prosecution, who pushed for reformative training (RT) instead, has appealed against the sentence.
According to a judgment made available on Friday (Mar 1), the boy lived with his sister and their parents at the time of the offences in 2020.
On Apr 21, 2020, the boy saw that his sister appeared to be in deep sleep. He molested her before sexually assaulting her.
Sometime between April 2020 and May 2020, the boy approached his sister and attempted to rape her. The girl pushed him away and told him to stop.
The offences came to light only in October 2022, when the Ministry of Social and Family Development lodged a police report.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Gladys Lim objected to the calling of a probation report, as asked for by the defence.
She said the boy, now 18, had committed “egregious sexual offences against his biological sister” and that probation would be “entirely incommensurate to the severity of the offending” and the aggravating factors.
She sought instead a term of reformative training – where a young offender is detained in a reformative training centre in a structured setting and required to undergo rehabilitation programmes.
Assessments found the teenager suitable for both probation and reformative training, but District Judge Carol Ling imposed probation instead.
The prosecutor argued against it, highlighting the teen’s moderate risk of sexual reoffending and his continued viewing of pornographic materials even after being caught for the offences.
But defence lawyer Kalaithasan Karuppaya from Regent Law said his client’s character was “still developing” and that he was remorseful.
The boy had no prior history of conflict with the law.
Judge Ling said there was no doubt that the offences were very serious, but she was of the view that he “could be given a chance at a community-based rehabilitation in the form of probation”.
One of the most important considerations was the boy’s age at the time of the offences, she said.
“He was only 14 years old then. It was clear from the probation report and the RT report that the offences were committed in part due to his curiosity and early and frequent exposure to pornography,” she added.
PORNOGRAPHY EXPOSURE
Social investigations by the probation officer showed that the boy was first exposed to porn when he was only four years old.
This was when his maternal cousin, also four, showed him a porn website on a tablet.
From 2017 to 2020, the boy’s frequency of watching porn increased.
The lead psychologist wrote in the boy’s RT report that his “early sexualisation experiences had likely disrupted his normative and healthy process of psychosexual development”.
“The early onset and frequent exposure to pornographic content at six years old introduced him to sexually inappropriate situations and influenced his understanding about sexuality … the regular exposure to pornography contributed to the development of inappropriate sexualised behaviours and preferences,” wrote the psychologist.
The judge said it was important to consider the circumstances that led to the commission of the offences.
He was approaching or experiencing puberty at the age of 14 at the time, and all four offences were committed in April or May 2020, with no further incidents.
“The short period within which the offences occurred indicated that the accused was at that material time, seeking sexual gratification (replicating what he had watched on pornography) and was acting out of curiosity,” said Judge Ling.
Once the boy realised his sister was unresponsive or expressed discomfort or unwillingness, he stopped.
LACK OF ADULT GUIDANCE
Judge Ling said this premature and heightened exposure to inappropriate sexualised behaviour was not helped by the fact that he did not have the benefit of proper adult guidance to address this developing sexual curiosity as he was growing up.
His parents travelled overseas frequently for work. It was only in 2018, when the boy’s father became a real estate agent, that the man could spend more time at home.
Throughout the boy’s growing-up years, it was “apparent that the parents were unaware of the accused’s engagement in unhealthy and covert sexual behaviour”, and found out only when the probation officer told them, the judge said.
While the circumstances precipitating the offences did not justify his acts against his sister, they provide insight into his offending, said the judge.
“To my mind, there was some room for understanding and compassion for a very young offender who may not have been able to fully appreciate the gravity and/or the full consequences of his actions on himself and his sister at the material time,” said Judge Ling.
The boy was also observed to have displayed “significant behavioural shifts such as respectful and consensual interactions with opposite-sex peers” after realising the harm he had caused his sister, the court heard.
On top of this, the boy also showed personal insight into his own offending, conveying guilt and recognising how his actions had broken his sister’s trust in him and disappointed his parents.
He has also sought to educate himself through his parents, social media and other means, in building positive and healthy relationships.
The boy’s parents also implemented parental control applications in his phone and computer and are ready to continue monitoring his device use.
The judge said the boy’s porn-watching habit could be “addressed through equipping him with appropriate sexual knowledge and strategies to cultivate healthier sexual habits”, with practical steps taking place “in a community under the guidance and supervision of the probation officer”.
On top of serving his probation period, the boy also has to serve 120 hours of community service, attend offence-specific treatment programmes and comply with the Child Protective Service’s safety plan.
However, since the prosecution has filed an application to appeal, the terms of probation have been stayed pending the outcome.