Woman fails to prove husband molested daughters; court throws out her bid for personal protection orders

SINGAPORE: A family court has dismissed a woman's applications for personal protection orders for her two young daughters, despite claiming that her husband had molested the children.

In response, the man said his daughter must have been coached to lie about being molested. He said it happened a few months after he suggested a divorce and claimed his wife wanted to get money from him in these proceedings.

In a judgment made available on Wednesday (Jul 19), District Judge Kathryn Thong dismissed the woman's applications.

She said the woman did not prove her claim that her husband had sexually assaulted their five-year-old daughter, referred to by the pseudonym "Elsa" in court documents.

There was also "not an iota of credible evidence" that the father had molested his younger daughter, aged two at the time of the alleged offence, said Judge Thong.

Even though the principal of the childcare centre Elsa attended had recorded a conversation where the girl said her father had touched her 10 times "inside" with his "long hands", the judge said the principal was not trained to investigate sexual assault and had asked leading questions.

Elsa was only five years old and had a high degree of suggestibility, added the judge.

THE CASE

At the time of the alleged offences in October 2020, the mother was a 41-year-old housewife and her husband was a 37-year-old chef who owned a catering business.

They had two daughters aged five and two, with the older one attending a childcare centre.

According to the man, only the first year of their seven years of marriage was a happy one. Three months before October 2020, the man broached the topic of divorce.

According to him, things went "downhill" after Elsa was born and his mother-in-law died, and their marriage was unhappy. 

On Oct 2, 2020, the principal of Elsa's childcare centre, named only as Ms A in court papers, called Elsa's mother. She said that Elsa's father had inappropriately touched Elsa.

Frightened, Elsa's mother spoke to her daughter about her conversation with the principal. Elsa said: "Mama, what I said is true."

According to Elsa's mother, her daughter pointed to her groin area and claimed that her father had touched her there more than 10 times with his "long hands".

The woman burst into tears and upon seeing her distress, Elsa started crying too.

Despite this, the woman did not move out or remove Elsa from her husband's company.

The family headed out to dinner two days later on Oct 4, 2020.

The mother wanted Elsa to sit in the back of the family car, but Elsa refused. She said it was okay, and that her father was not touching her.

It was only a day later that the man asked what was wrong and his wife finally asked him if he had done anything to Elsa.

According to the woman, the man started "getting defensive", yelled at her, called her "crazy" and spewed vulgarities at her.

TESTIMONY BY THE CHILDCARE CENTRE PRINCIPAL

Ms A had to be subpoenaed before she would provide her testimony. She said she was having a general conversation with Elsa on Oct 2, 2020 when Elsa mentioned being touched by her father.

Ms A took the girl into her office and recorded the conversation in three intervals for proof. The girl said her father had removed her underwear while she was sleeping and her mother was busy.

The girl said it happened a few times. Ms A said Elsa did not appear to be in distress when recounting the alleged incidents, and there was nothing unusual about her behaviour in the days before and after the conversation.

Ms A felt Elsa was telling the truth, as children would not initiate such topics for conversation, but said Elsa did not understand English "all that much".

This was Ms A's first time encountering a situation of alleged sexual assault.

The police were alerted to the case and Child Protective Service (CPS) officers investigated the issue. According to a CPS report, Elsa said she and her sister had been inappropriately touched by their father, but no specifics were given on the number of instances, "just that it happened many times".

The three CPS officers who testified said the police were in charge of the criminal process while CPS was more concerned about the "social aspect" or safety planning for the family.

CPS' role was not to find out if the harm had taken place or not, but to put in place measures to ensure that the child is safe at home and to decide on suitable support services, the court heard.

Even if the police took no further action against an alleged perpetrator, CPS may still be unable to close a case because of concerns surrounding the child's safety.

In the case of Elsa, the police eventually took no further action against her father.

THE FATHER'S CASE

The man said he first realised things were amiss on Oct 4, 2020, when they were getting into the family car to head for dinner.

Usually, his wife sat in the front next to him. But on that day, Elsa climbed into the front seat, blurting out these words while pointing to her private parts: "Papa touch me. Papa touch me."

He responded: "Hey, what are you saying?"

The girl said: "See, Mama? Papa never touch me."

The man said he was unaware of what had transpired between his wife, Ms A and the CPS officers, and it was only when the police called him down for an interview a few days later that he realised the gravity of the allegations against him.

He said it sounded like Elsa was parroting someone when she said "Papa touch me, papa touch me". He believed his daughter was coached to say the things she did.

While his wife had said her daughter did not lie, the man said he remembered Elsa lying before over a toy.

He vehemently denied each allegation of sexual assault put to him and pointed to his wife's behaviour. He showed messages from her asking for money for a male orphan they were sponsoring in the Philippines on Oct 2, 2020, when his wife first learnt of the allegations from Ms A.

That same day, she sent him messages asking him to come home, to pay Elsa's school fees and whether he would be picking her and the kids up.

The man said his wife would not have continued to ask him for money or to fetch her if he had committed those heinous acts. His wife could have chosen to stay at her cousin's landed property if he had sexually assaulted his kids.

He believed that she had filed the application to obtain sole care and control of the children so she would be entitled to maintenance for herself and the kids.

The man lamented that his entire life had been upended because of the "spurious allegations" and that it pained him not to see his daughters, whom he loved very much.

THE JUDGE'S FINDINGS

Judge Thong observed the father's demeanour during the proceedings and found him to be forthright and truthful. She noted how he appeared genuinely frustrated and angered at how his wife had engineered the proceedings "just to extract monies from him" and was "flabbergasted at how he could have been accused of such disgusting acts just for financial gain".

She said it was not safe for a court to place weight on a response where a child quite casually counts off multiple incidents of molestation.

"Ten separate incidents is a lot to recall on the spot and either Elsa was primed to say this or she was simply talking unthinkingly, with no regard to the truth of her words, as any ordinary five-year-old is prone to do," said the judge.

"Generally, I would be slow to rely on a five-year-old’s words particularly when they are highly suggestible and may have unarticulated reasons for saying certain things.

"Sometimes, they are just thoughtlessly answering questions because of disinterest, boredom or in an attempt to provoke a reaction from the asker and could easily muddle up fact and fiction."

She said what was more useful was how a five-year-old chose to behave unprompted.

"When Elsa chose to sit in front next to the father when they went to the eatery for dinner, I found this to be an objective piece of evidence which demonstrated that Elsa was not fearful of him at all," said the judge.

She ordered each party to bear their own costs.

Elsa's mother is appealing against the decision.