A former Trust Yoga teacher was found guilty of five works of sexually abusing three girls while attending his lessons on May 16 in Singapore.
After the prosecutor determined that the person’s testimony was never “unusually convincing,” Rajpal Singh, 34, was cleared of three counts of molesting a fifth student.
The person faces a full of 10 costs. During his test, two charges involving a second person were dropped.
He was charged with inflicting a smack on the thighs and touching the five women’s privates during his yoga sessions in 2019 and 2020.
Anil Changaroth Wong, a solicitor for RHTLaw Asia, led Singh’s defense at trial, contending that he did not commit these natural functions.
He testified that no yoga modifications may involve touching a person’s personal parts, and that he was “very cautious” not to feel those parts during adjustments.
The plaintiffs ‘ names are kept confidential by a court order.
Delivering Thursday’s view, District Judge Sharmila Sripathy- Shanaz said that three of the females- whom she referred to as Ms C, Ms V and Ms R- were “unusually convincing” testimony.
However, she found guilty of three counts of a third woman, who she refers to as Ms. Y.
The prosecutor argued that the stability of a complainant’s evidence may be a determining factor in the present case, even though Ms. Y was merely a sincere witness.
In the absence of any additional proof, I believe Ms. Y’s extended effective, uninitiated, and vocal support for Mr. Rajpal in the midst of her alleged molestation incompatible with her claims of molestation.
The prosecutor made reference to two WhatsApp messages that Ms. Y had sent to another trial testimony and Singh. In Ms Y’s information to Singh on Aug 3, 2022, she vouched for him. This occurred after he reportedly reportedly molestered her that month.
According to the lawyer’s arguments, Ms Y’s description of the WhatsApp messages stated that she “felt that it was easier for her to state that the instances of molest did not occur” at the time.
Despite her explanations in court, Judge Sripathy-Shanaz said,” This results in misgivings about the stability of her tale, and ultimately limits a conclusion that her testimony is exceedingly convincing.”
The judge nevertheless accepted the stories of Ms C, Ms V and Ms R, which she said were detailed, textured and constant, and provided convincing, compelling information.
This was in” striking comparison” to the case put forth by the army, which the judge said contained materials deficits that undermined the wisdom of Singh’s says.
In one example, Singh unintentionally claimed at trial that he had just touched Ms. C’s knee, contrary to his earlier claim that he had tapped her sides near her buttocks.
” Having examined the information, I find myself unable to put any weight on Mr. Rajpal’s forced and shifting explanations as to why this is the case,” said the judge.
The prosecutor noted that the defense had presented an alternative defense that if he did look Ms V and R, he was simply altering their constitutes at trial.
This was “glaringly contradictory” with Singh’s broader army that no pilates adjustments may actually involve him touching a person’s personal parts, said the prosecutor.
” These contradictory and competing claims in the defence’s case render Mr Rajpal’s case devoid of credibility”, she said.
Judge Sripathy- Shanaz also determined that the three women’s credibility was not harmed by their actions following the incidents.
Ms C remained in class for the duration of the lesson without venting her discomfort after being molested. She claimed that this was because she was shocked and unsure of how to respond.
Months after being molested, Ms. V and Ms. R filed police reports.
The judge said Ms V was able to explain her” seemingly counterintuitive behaviour” following the assaults.
She, for instance, stated that she continued to study even after Mr. Rajpal punched her.
buttocks because she witnessed him causing it to other students who did n’t react, according to the judge.
Ms. V was perplexed by this because she believed it to be Mr. Rajpal’s method of instruction and was therefore reluctant to turn a mountain out of a molehill.
Judge Sripathy-Shanaz also noted that the defense did not contest Singh’s claim that he had slapped his fellow students ‘ buttocks.
The judge stated that it was” well established that a complainant of sexual assault cannot always be expected to act in accordance with what might be perceived as a typical or expected response.”
” Our legal system recognises that each individual’s reaction to trauma is unique and personal. Therefore, the absence of immediate confrontation should not be viewed as a marker of the credibility or veracity of a complainant’s claim”.
A delayed police report is not a guarantee that a sexual assault allegation is true, she added.
She said,” Sexual offences frequently have significant psychological and emotional complexity that prevents immediate reporting.”
” Complainants may experience a range of overwhelming emotions, such as fear, shame or confusion, which can impact their ability to come forward promptly”.
In July, Singh will go back to court to await his sentencing. The Indian national, whose passport has been impounded, is out on bail of S$ 25, 000.
The punishment for outraging a person’s modesty is up to two years in jail, a fine, caning, or any combination of these penalties.