Apex court dismisses appeal for lower sentence by man who prostituted wife, sexually assaulted daughter

SINGAPORE: A man's bid to get his jail term lowered for prostituting his wife, sexually assaulting his daughter and molesting his wife's niece failed on Thursday (Jul 16) after the Apex Court dismissed his appeal.

The 29-year-old man, who cannot be named due to gag orders protecting the victims' identities, had been sentenced to 25-and-a-half years' jail in February 2019.

He was also given 24 strokes of the cane and a fine of S$12,000 to disgorge the profits he had earned from the prostitution, in the first case of its kind in Singapore.

READ: 'Monster' who prostituted wife, sexually assaulted 6-year-old daughter gets jail, caning

His newly appointed lawyer had tried to ask for the sentence to be lowered to 18 years' jail and 12 strokes of the cane.

However, Judges of Appeal Judith Prakash and Tay Yong Kwang, along with Justice Woo Bih Li, disagreed with arguments set out in the appeal.

JUDGES DID NOT ACCEPT DEFENCE'S ARGUMENTS

Delivering the verdict, Justice Prakash said they did not accept lawyer Mohammad Shafiq Haja Maideen's arguments that the trial judge had been "wrongly influenced" as he was disgusted by the offender's overall conduct.

The judgement was instead reflective of society's views and not "exaggerated or extreme in any way", said the judge.

Responding to the defence's argument that the offender's crime against his six-year-old daughter was only "once", Justice Prakash said "we cannot accept this submission".

"The very age of the daughter, six years, indicates that in comparison with the appellant, she was physically frail and very much less mentally developed," she said.

Instead, he forced his daughter to fellate him even though she resisted.

"These facts speak for themselves," said the judge. "The abuse of trust was grave. The victim was entitled to expect that her father would protect her from harm, rather than inflict it."

She added that abuse of trust "is qualitative" and that "even one instance is one too many".

The defence had argued that the Prevention of Human Trafficking Act was meant for cases imported into Singapore and not local cases, as the offender had trafficked his wife.

"We cannot agree," said Justice Prakash. "A piece of legislation may have more than one intention ... the legislation was not drafted so as to exclude local trafficking."

The offender, dubbed a "monster" by the prosecution at trial, had physically and psychologically abused his wife even when she was pregnant and forced her to turn to prostitution to earn money faster.

He forced her to service numerous men, and increased her humiliation "by compelling her to video some of the activities", said Justice Prakash.

"He even had the gall of hitting her because he was jealous, watching her adopt certain sexual positions with a client."

She noted also that there was premeditation and deception in his offence against his wife's 13-year-old niece. He had forced his wife to take her niece to a hotel room under false pretences, where he molested her and stuffed a pillow over her face to stop her screams, lifting it only when she fainted.

"We are satisfied that the sentence imposed on the appellant by the trial judge was not manifestly excessive and the appeal is dismissed," said Justice Prakash.

READ: 'Monster' who prostituted wife and sexually assaulted daughter unintelligible in appeal attempt

The offender had tried previously to appeal his sentence without a lawyer, but spoke unintelligibly and mumbled, hitting his own head with his palm several times.

The hearing was adjourned at the time, with instructions for him to find a lawyer.

He pleaded guilty to one charge each of sexual assault by penetration of a minor, prostituting his wife, receiving payment over exploitation of a trafficked victim and aggravated outrage of modesty.

Another four charges were taken into consideration. The prosecution had described the man as a "monster" with "unprecedented" sordid sexual depravity, and the case drew widespread attention, with Law Minister K Shanmugam commenting on the case after it was concluded, calling it "horrific".