Driver who severed pedestrian's body to serve original 11-year jail term as court dismisses appeals
The man had failed to notice a 64-year-old retiree crossing Dunearn Road and struck him at a speed of between 111kmh and 122kmh.
A view of the Supreme Court building in Singapore.
This audio is generated by an AI tool.
Warning: This story contains graphic descriptions
SINGAPORE: A man who drove drunk at high speed and hit a retiree, severing his body into three parts, will serve his original sentence of 11 years' jail after the High Court on Monday (Sep 7) dismissed both the prosecution's appeal for a longer sentence and the defence's bid for a shorter one.
The 46-year-old Australian, a Singapore permanent resident, was sentenced in February to 11 years' jail, a fine of S$12,000 (US$9,473) and a driving ban of 15 years.
This is believed to be one of the longest sentences meted out for such offences.
CNA is not naming the man as doing so could identify his two children, who were aged three and four at the time of the offence and are protected by a gag order.
He had pleaded guilty to one count of dangerous driving causing death as a "serious repeat-repeat offender" and a second charge of repeat drink driving.
A third charge for dangerous driving involving his children was considered in sentencing.
The man had been driving home from a child's birthday party on Apr 23, 2023 after drinking wine, with his two children in the back.
He failed to notice the 64-year-old Singaporean retiree crossing Dunearn Road towards Bukit Timah Canal and struck him while travelling at between 111kmh and 122kmh on a road with a speed limit of 70kmh.
The force of the crash severed the victim's body into three parts, with his torso and head crashing through the windscreen and landing on the offender's lap.
The impact shattered the windscreen of the man's silver BMW M3 Coupe and injured his two children.
Prosecutors had pushed to increase his jail term to 12 years and nine months, while the man's lawyers sought a sentence of six years and four months to eight years.
JUDGE'S REASONS
Justice Christopher Tan said there was merit to both appeals, but they were ultimately not enough to allow him to grant the appeal on either side.
On the defence's appeal, he said some of the increases applied to the sentence could have been moderated, but this was not reason enough to allow the appeal.
He agreed with the prosecution that the sentencing "discount" for the man's guilty plea should have been 20 per cent and not the 30 per cent that was awarded.
Overall, he said, the lower court judge's sentencing decision was "by and large solidly reasoned".
The prosecution had earlier argued that the 30 per cent discount given by the lower court judge, Principal District Judge Toh Han Li, had been given in error. This was because the offender had indicated he would plead guilty only within Stage 2 of the guidelines and not Stage 1.
In Singapore, accused persons may receive a reduction of up to 30 per cent in their jail sentence if they plead guilty. The guidelines set out four stages of criminal proceedings, with the maximum sentencing reduction for a guilty plea decreasing at each stage.
