8 months' jail for man who destroyed anti-littering cameras, then threw bicycle from 14th floor of HDB block

SINGAPORE — A man with a history of high-rise littering destroyed several surveillance cameras he was convinced were targeting him, then threw a bicycle from the 14th floor of a public housing block a month or so later.

On Wednesday (April 24), Boo Hwa Boon, 63, was sentenced to eight months’ jail after pleading guilty to committing an act of mischief disrupting a public agency, as well as a rash act endangering human life and safety.

Another two charges were taken into consideration in sentencing.

DAMAGED TWO SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS

Some time on or before Aug 21 last year, Boo noticed that surveillance cameras had been deployed at Block 385 Bukit Batok West Avenue 5 to monitor and catch high-rise littering.

The cameras were installed by OneBerry Technologies, which the National Environment Agency (NEA) had engaged to provide video analytics and surveillance services against high-rise littering.

Boo felt that the surveillance cameras were targeted at him, because he had previously littered from his housing unit.

In 2021, he was sentenced to three months’ jail for a similar act of mischief — after he destroyed a surveillance camera with a hammer after believing that it was installed to monitor him.

In the latest case, Boo headed to the public housing block on Aug 21 last year with a spray bottle containing liquid bleach.

He found the surveillance cameras and pried open their electrical boxes, before spraying the liquid bleach at the electrical cables within the boxes.

This caused one of the camera’s transmission feeds to become out of focus, while another camera’s feed got disconnected.

When OneBerry deployed a technical team to the cameras’ location, workers found that both cameras were damaged beyond use.

On Aug 22, a project coordinator at OneBerry filed a police report about the two damaged surveillance cameras.

DAMAGED ANOTHER THREE CAMERAS A WEEK LATER

OneBerry then set up two other surveillance cameras at a nearby location, Block 388 Bukit Batok West Avenue 5. The company also installed a third observational camera to monitor these surveillance cameras.

On the evening of Aug 30, Boo went in search of the two surveillance cameras at Block 388. Court documents did not state how he found out about the new cameras or why he decided to look for them.

After finding the two surveillance cameras on the 12th floor of the block, Boo headed home to take a spray bottle filled with liquid laundry detergent. 

He returned to Block 388 at about 8pm, pried open the cameras’ electrical boxes, and sprayed the liquid laundry detergent at their electrical cables — causing the transmission feeds of all three cameras to be disconnected.

OneBerry’s technical team later found that all three cameras were damaged beyond use.

On Aug 31, the OneBerry project coordinator filed a separate police report about the three damaged cameras.

Court documents stated that the cost of damage to each camera is estimated to be S$5,000. Having damaged a total of five cameras, Boo is estimated to have caused a total damage of about S$25,000.

THREW BICYCLE FROM HIGH FLOOR

Some time between the late evening of Sept 21 and the early morning of Sept 22 last year, Boo was supposedly frustrated that he could not sleep, and headed to the 14th floor of the public housing block where he lives. The block and address were not disclosed in court documents.

On the 14th floor, Boo found a blue-coloured metal-framed bicycle that had supposedly been abandoned.

He picked up the bicycle and threw it to the second floor before returning home.

The bicycle landed on the common corridor of the second floor, where it damaged several flower pots.

Court documents stated that a police report of high-rise littering was made on Sept 22.

Boo, who was not represented by a lawyer, told the court on Wednesday that he was worried about what would happen to his family should he go to jail.

His wife, who works part-time, would not be able to work because she would have to care for their son, who has autism.

Boo asked that the courts impose a fine for his offences rather than a jail term.

In response, District Judge Luke Tan said that as much as he sympathised with Boo’s situation, this was a case where the facts showed that Boo had damaged these cameras that were installed to prevent high-rise littering.

Pointing out Boo’s past jail term of three months, District Judge Tan said: “You should have known that if you commit these offences (again), your sentence would have been worse than three months.

“No matter what you think, these cameras are not directed at you. They are directed at people like you.

“If you happen to decide to commit such offences, you will be caught — that’s what (the cameras) are here for.”

Highlighting Boo’s act of throwing the bicycle from the 14th floor, District Judge Tan added that Boo had “no concern whatsoever… for the life and limbs” of the residents below.

“Fortunately for them, no one was hurt. And also fortunately for you, because it would have been much worse for you if something like that had happened.”

For committing an act of mischief that disrupts the performance of any duty or function of a public agency, Boo could have been jailed for up to 10 years or fined, or both.

For committing a rash act that endangers human life or the personal safety of others, Boo could have been jailed for up to a year or fined up to S$5,000, or both.