SINGAPORE: A domestic helper from Myanmar was sentenced to one year and four weeks in jail on Tuesday ( Feb 11 ) for hitting and manhandling his 82-year-old charge, who suffered from dementia and Alzheimer’s.  ,
Thant Zin Oo, 36, entered a guilty plea to three counts of deliberately injuring a resilient person. For his punishment, more related charges were taken into account.
Zin was hired as a domestic helper five-and-a-half years ago for the sufferer, who has suffered from memory since 2015. He shared a chamber with and took care of the person, who also had Alzheimer’s at the time of the abuse.  ,
According to his situation, the victim needed Zin to help him walk about, wash, have and change his clothes and babies. He relyed on the domestic companion for his everyday requirements because he was primarily bed-bound.  ,
The local helper struck the defendant’s head five times between February and March of that year, hitting his head on the wall or futon.  ,
The prosecutor was informed that the sufferer had no idea how to properly recall or report any abuse to him.  ,
In the apartment where Zin stayed with the prey, there were no concerns about his pay, meals, or quantity of sleep.  ,
In earlier 2023, the defendant’s boy, who visited him about once a week, noticed scars on his father’s neck and shoulders, and asked Zin about what had happened.  ,
The victim’s son asked the domestic helper to let him know if any fresh bruises came up so they could get medical attention if necessary, and the victim claimed the victim possibly hit himself or scratched while he was asleep.  ,
In mid-2023, another landlord informed the victim’s son that Zin frequently shouted at the target, and in August that time, the defendant’s son and daughter decided to monitor the situation by installing a closed-circuit television cameras, which produced images that would be overwritten about every two weeks.  ,
The victim’s home began to feel that something was wrong in the film in March 2024; they were” frightened” to discover videos of Zin abusing the victim.  ,
On April 1, 2024, the victim’s son made the decision to take him to the doctor to check for injuries, where the medical staff filed a police statement.  ,
Zin was arrested on Apr 3, 2024. During examinations, he denied abusing the target and claimed his steps were an injury, despite having seen the film footage, the jury heard.  ,
“VERY SERIOUS” ABUSE OF TRUST
Teo Lu Jia, Deputy Public Prosecutor, asked the judge to contemplate the need for punishment and retribution and noted that the event involved an misuse of faith and unwarranted crime.  ,
She called for a word of 16-and-a-half month, noting that the sufferer was both physically and mentally ill. He was insane and unable to defend himself, which would have made it difficult to spot.  ,
Ms Teo noted the “very severe” abuse of confidence, since Zin was hired, paid by and treated well by the family to take care of the target.  ,
” There was evidently an misuse of faith. He was the caretaker, but he instead went to overuse the victim”, she added.  ,
The video images also demonstrated that the five abuse incidents occurred over a period of time, which indicated that this was not a one-time act of annoyance, according to Ms Teo, noting that Zin even targeted prone areas like the defendant’s head and neck.  ,
Zin’s solicitor, Mr U Sudharshanraj Naidu from Withers KhattarWong, argued that Zin had” no intentional goal” to cause suffering or go out of his means in the course of his work to produce harm to the victim.  ,
Mr. Naidu noted that Zin was wearing a back brace in the video footage and that transferring the victim was” really a tough task.”  ,
He also provided a figure research from the victim’s brother, which stated that Zin had frequently overdone his duties, including preparing for the sufferer and cutting his hair.  ,
While Zin is “extremely guilty” for what he did, his steps were a “negative embodiment” of caregiver problem, said Mr Naidu.  ,
Due to the language barrier, Zin was unable to speak with the target and had “limited information” of how to deal with a person with delirium. He added that the private companion had lost his patience while taking care of an individual who is hard to take care of.
The victim’s child” also stands by” Zin despite what he did, and was present in court to show his support, said Mr Naidu.  ,
In reply, Ms Teo argued that caretaker burden should not be a limiting factor, noting that the victim’s family arranged for Zin to participate” a whole host” of classes, including initial aid and old care.  ,
She continued, adding that the victim’s family also offered to stay in when Zin wanted to leave.” This is not a case where no support was given to him.  ,
District Judge Salina Ishak agreed that there was a compelling reason to” send a deterrent signal” regarding Zin’s sentence because many Singaporeans employ domestic helpers and the case may “engender serious public disquiet.”  ,
She also noted that if not for the victim’s family checking closed-circuit television footage, the abuse would not have been discovered.  ,
The punishment for voluntarily causing hurt is up to three years in prison, a fine of up to S$ 5, 000, or both. If someone acts against a vulnerable person, they could receive a double sentence.  ,