Asia (Page 1,368)

After the trial successfully appealed on Friday ( Sep 6), a 16-year-old boy who sexually assaulted a 14-year-old child will have to go through an eight-year prison term and three wood strokes instead of reformative training.

The young man, now 20, had filed an appeal against the sentence, arguing that rape was the most serious of sexual crimes, and that his youth should n’t be at the forefront of matters.

The Court of Appeal, comprising Justices Tay Yong Kwang, Steven Chong and Debbie Ong, agreed with the trial.

Justice Tay delivered the ruling following a day of arguments, stating that the judge is typically ready to take into account a 16-year-old rape or even probation.

” But, the accused was no common 16-year-old”, said the judge. &nbsp,

He said the young gentleman had a series of fraud crimes from time 13, stealing bike, electric scooters and batteries.

He had retaliated by stealing while awaiting bail for fraud charges. While he was receiving a higher loan sum, he raped his classmate in a disabled toilet while her boyfriend held her down, and he did it on June 27, 2020.

” He was warned that if he committed new crimes, there will be no more bail”, said Justice Tay. Because he continued to undertake the current murder infraction and two more thefts, the re-arrest and caution had no impact at all on him.

The criminal received his first stint of corrective training (RT ) in October 2020 because the assault offence only became public in February 2021.

” It is correct that when the accused committed the murder on Jun 27, 2020, he had not yet undergone the second RT,” said Justice Tay.

Although it cannot be said that RT had no impact on his criminal tendencies, treatment is not the best course of action in this situation given his history of crimes and his total disrespect or disobedience of the law.

Justice Tay said the young gentleman had raped a 14-year-old colleague who was obviously intoxicated and afraid, and that he did but” with drop” without protection.

” Specific punishment is obviously needed to instill some fear and respect for the law into this young man,” said Justice Tay.

Context OF THE CASE

After pleading guilty to one count of murder, the offender was given a maximum detention phase of a time in January and was sentenced to reformative teaching.

Justice Pang Khang Chau once said to him,” This is your last chance.”

All parties may become named to guard the murderer’s identity.

After learning on cultural advertising that they were having a drinking program it, the offender had traveled to Admiralty Park to go with the victim and her partner.

Her partner and the perpetrator went to the girl’s location to find her while she was urking in the public restroom.

The criminal raped the child while her partner held her down before holding her jacket over her face and keeping it there until she was done.

Eventually, the boyfriend placed the blame on the woman for having intercourse with the criminal, and she ended her relationship with him. Eventually, her family reported to the police.

The partner was accused of assisting murder.

Quarrels BY Prosecutors AND Army

On Friday, deputy public prosecutor Yvonne Poon and Sheldon Lim argued that the corrective training should be replaced with a sentence of eight to ten years in prison and six to eight cane strikes.

Ms Poon said youth only is” no guarantee” that remedial rules should be at the forefront of a prosecutor’s punishment factors.

We contend that this is the situation because there are cases where punishment and retribution are required to take precedent, she said.

She said murder was the gravest of all physical offences, and cited three worsening factors in this case: The murderer’s risk in terms of her age and alcohol, the party element of the attack, and the fact that no condom was used.

She claimed that the criminal “certainly exploited that risk afterward,” even though the victim had not yet rendered the victim resilient through alcohol.

The prey was clearly incapable of sustaining herself physically and was inebriated, according to Ms. Poon.

Military doctors Mato Kotwani and Wong Min Hui from PDLegal argued against the prosecution’s proposals, but said if a prison term had to be imposed, not more than seven-and-a-half years ‘ prisons should be given, along with four strokes of the wood.

Mr Kotwani said he did not deny that rape is the most serious sexual offence, and that inherently, rape is a serious offence.

However, he said the severity of rape offences can “vary across a wide spectrum”.

He claimed that his client only sexually assaulted the victim because her boyfriend had repeatedly invited him to do so.

According to Justice Chong, the offender may have initially been receptive.

” But I find it challenging to accept that he was coerced, or that he did it out of fear.” He was definitely encouraged, but he accepted the encouragement. He responded to it. Otherwise, we wo n’t be here”, said the judge.

THE VICTIM-BLAMING

He requested that the defense address the court regarding the young man’s alleged victim-blaming.

According to Justice Chong,” That is important because you are not a suitable candidate for rehabilitation if you do n’t take responsibility for your own actions and try to assign some responsibility to the victim,” she said.

The report that evaluated the young man’s suitability for reformative training contained the prosecution’s allegations that the young man had engaged in victim-blaming.

Mr. Kotwani claimed that the statements his client had made were made from a “historical perspective,” meaning he was presenting his past views to the interviewer.

The offender had provided the interviewer with a historical perspective on various factors, including his poor academic performance, his alcohol and drug use, and how he stole because” saving money takes very long”

” When we come to the attitude and orientation for the current offence, we see that the author writes that he presented attitudes that minimize responsibility for his actions,” said Mr. Kotwani.

The author’s specific questions and responses are what we do n’t have, the author asserts. It’s very likely that he could have been giving the perspective that this is why I did these things in the past, according to the attorney, given the interview process and the need to explain why he did them in the past.

Justice Chong cited a section of the report where the author claimed that the young man had “minimized the impact of the crime on the victim and shifted the blame to the victim”

The offender had said the victim appeared to be “enjoying” herself.

” If you say this is historical, it would mean that what he agreed to in the statement of facts is false, because in the statement of facts, he says she did not consent”, said Justice Chong. ” To say she was enjoying the sexual act… you ca n’t have it both ways”.

He continued, noting that the offender never used that phrase to express his disapproval.

Mr. Kotwani pointed to a different section of his client’s statement in which he acknowledged that it was inappropriate for him to have had sex with the victim. It would be strange if he initially acknowledged this but later admitted guilt to the victim, he said.

” No, it’s trying to minimise his blameworthiness, obviously”, replied Justice Chong.

The defense attorney then urged the court to take into account his client’s behavior throughout the entire process because he had cooperated, been honest, and admitted guilt right away.

” I think all of this counts for something, and it shows that he is in fact remorseful and he accepts what he did was wrong”, said Mr Kotwani.

We have a situation where we have to weigh his entire behavior against some statements he made during the interview process, and we want to make it sound that there is some doubt about how true the statements were interpreted and what was said.

Justice Chong told Mr. Kotwani that “we’ve got to take the report as it is and draw the appropriate inferences” and that it was” not fair” to cast doubt on the report’s accuracy at this point.

Had the defense asserted that there were doubts about the report’s accuracy, they could have requested a Newton hearing, a hearing to decide on disputed issues, and the report’s author could have been brought before the court.

In continuing, Mr. Kotwani stated that age is” a very important factor” and that the lack of maturity that young offenders exhibits is demonstrated in their thinking and behavior,” and that’s the very reason reformation is so important.”

The prosecutor, Ms Poon, responded on the victim-blaming arguments and said there was one clear paragraph in the RT report to show it was not historical.

The offender had mentioned in the report that the victim had continued to hang out with him and that she had presented her with a negative view of how she had slept and sat on the same bed as him and his girlfriend.

These things have nothing to do with the offense being committed. They relate to the way he handled himself following the offense, according to Ms Poon.

” For him to continue to hold these beliefs and bring them up after he had pleaded guilty and unreservedly apologised… shows that he is indeed hardened and did not internalize any remorse or accountability of his actions at all.”

The offender appeared depressed as the verdict was read out. He observed his family members, who had supported him in court.

He was given the opportunity to begin his jail term three weeks later, on September 27, because he has to support his family after a fire broke out at their apartment on August 27.

Justice Tay initially inquired as to why his five siblings were unable to assist, but the judges decided against it after Mr. Kotwani explained that his client’s older sister was married, his brother was in the military, and his younger sisters were still attending school.

Until then, the offender remains out on bail of S$ 10, 000. &nbsp,

Continue Reading