Apex court raises jail term of retiree who sexually assaulted boy in public toilet
The prosecution had filed the appeal to increase Chua Hock Leong’s sentence, after the High Court imposed the minimum of eight years behind bars for sexual assault by penetration of a person under 14.
SINGAPORE – A retiree who lured a 12-year-old boy into a public toilet with S$2 and sexually assaulted his victim had his jail term raised from eight to 11 years on Tuesday (June 26).
Because of Chua Hock Leong’s decision to claim trial, the boy was made to recount the ordeal, noted Judge of Appeal Andrew Phang, who delivered the apex court’s decision.
The boy, who is now 15, suffered emotionally and psychologically. He became withdrawn, no longer enjoyed going out and became “very afraid” of talking to elderly men, said Judge of Appeal Phang, who ruled together with Judges of Appeal Judith Prakash and Tay Yong Kwang.
Given Chua’s age when he committed the offence in 2016 – 61, which is above the age ceiling of 50 for men to be caned here – extra jail time of six months was also warranted.
The prosecution had filed the appeal to increase Chua’s sentence after the High Court imposed the minimum of eight years behind bars for sexual assault by penetration of a person under 14.
In January 2016, Chua came across the boy, a stranger, at the void deck of an HDB block. Then in Secondary One, the boy was waiting for his friend.
Enticing the boy with S$2 to follow him to a toilet cubicle at Tampines Eco Park, located near the HDB block, Chua then performed sexual acts on the boy for one minute. According to court documents, the boy “felt pain” and fled after pushing Chua away.
Calling for a 12-year jail term, Deputy Public Prosecutor Terence Chua argued that the High Court, in its ruling in July last year, had departed from established sentencing benchmarks “without any justifiable basis”.
Chua’s case ought to fall within the sentencing band for cases with two or more offence-specific aggravating factors, where offenders are liable for 10 to 15 years’ imprisonment.
DPP Chua said the High Court had failed to consider aggravating factors such as the fact that Chua had exploited and breached the boy’s trust and confidence.
The High Court also failed to give due weight to the psychological trauma inflicted on the victim, which DPP Chua said was “far reaching and remains ever present in the victim’s psyche”.
In his victim impact statement, the boy had said: “Life is no longer the same for me.”
“I don’t know why old man can do such thing to young man and whenever I think of it, I felt sad,” he added.
