Father acquitted of all charges of raping 12-year-old daughter, sexually abusing her

SINGAPORE: A man who mounted an "all-or-nothing" defence by denying all 13 charges which include sexual abuse and rape levied against him by his biological daughter was fully acquitted by the High Court on Thursday (Mar 21).

The 37-year-old man, who cannot be named due to the gag order that is still in place, was cleared of 13 charges which include aggravated rape, sexual assault and showing pornography to his daughter.

Justice Valerie Thean went through the details of each charge to explain why she found the evidence of the daughter inconsistent and not "unusually convincing" enough to warrant convictions.

The girl's evidence did not cohere - what she said in court pertaining to dates and what sort of acts had happened differed at points from what she said in police statements, to her school counsellor and her psychiatrist.

The judge said the prosecution had asserted it had two types of evidence that corroborated the daughter's account - medical evidence, as well as the girl's repeated complaints of sexual abuse to her friends and other people.

However, Justice Thean rejected these categories and looked at the girl's evidence alone. She said the girl's evidence must be unusually convincing to secure a conviction on any of the charges.

THE GIRL'S CASE

The charges alleged that the man first sexually abused his daughter in the shower when she was in kindergarten.

He then allegedly began showing her pornography when she was in Primary 3, before sexually assaulting her when she approached puberty two or three years later.

According to the daughter, the man made her perform sex acts on him at various places including parts of their house and the bottom of a staircase at her friend's home.

The man is also accused of sodomising and raping his daughter when she was 12, and using sex toys on her.

Justice Thean first tackled the girl's "power of recall".

During investigations, the girl said she first told her boyfriend G about the sexual abuse in July 2019.

However, she testified at trial that she had told a friend about it in June 2019 before telling another friend the next day.

This raises a concern about "the quality of her recall", said the judge.

Another key issue was the girl's narrative about a retracted message.

The girl claimed that she had disclosed the sexual abuse to her boyfriend before sending another message retracting it.

She had testified that her father stood next to her in the living room when she sent this message, saying her father had exerted pressure on her to retract it.

However, defence lawyer Cory Wong from Invictus Law and Mr Ramesh Tiwary relied on text messages from their client's phone to show he was not there at that time.

During cross-examination, the girl then said her father could have been beside her at the time and she was unsure.

"In my view, this retraction message is a key event in (the girl's) narrative, because she testified that she sent it only because of the pressure (her father) exerted on her by standing behind her and watching her draft it," said Justice Thean.

"It would have been an important event to (her) because she feared losing her standing with G."

The judge said if the girl had been mistaken on this issue, it would impinge on the reliability of her evidence.

While these two points do not mean that the girl's evidence cannot be convincing when taken as a whole, Justice Thean said they formed the context against which her evidence was to be assessed.

JUDGE RUNS THROUGH THE CHARGES

She then ran through all the charges levied against the accused and acquitted him of all of them, citing inconsistencies in the girl's evidence.

While Justice Thean said inconsistencies in a case like this involving multiple events over a prolonged period of six to seven years were "inevitable and to be expected", there were key "focal points" that showed inconsistencies.

The first was the girl's account of the use of sex toys.

She gave different dates as to when her father allegedly began using sex toys on her - the date she gave in court was at odds with the date she wrote in a "runaway letter", said the judge.

The girl also gave conflicting answers as to when a sex toy was first used on her.

At first she said it could have been when she was in Primary 5, but this was inconsistent with her accounts to a psychiatrist and school counsellor respectively.

Justice Thean said there was little reason for the girl to provide different dates to the psychiatrist and school counsellor, who both questioned her on the same day.

At trial, the prosecution obtained receipts to show that the two sex toys were bought online and delivered only on Aug 20, 2019.

This was well after the dates the girl used, and no evidence was adduced to suggest her father had any other sex toys, said the judge.

She said the girl's inconsistencies were "significant" on this issue, and that even if the judge accepted she was mistaken at trial, her memory is called into question.

Another key issue was whether the man had ejaculated. The girl testified that he had on all occasions, but her account again showed inconsistencies.

Justice Thean said such occurrences would be difficult for a young victim to forget, and her inconsistency in this affected her accounts of several of the charges.

As for the most serious charge of rape, which the girl alleged occurred in the master bedroom in August 2019, Justice Thean found inconsistencies in her account.

First, it contradicts her account of abuse to her psychiatrist. The girl had told the psychiatrist that her father raped her twice in August 2019.

However, she recalled only one incident in court. 

The location of the alleged incident also differed in the girl's descriptions to her friend, who testified in court about what she heard.

Justice Thean said the 13 charges allege a history of grooming and abuse, where independent or reliable corroboration is absent.

While she expected some inconsistencies as the offences took place over multiple years, the present case involved contradictions that concern the "key foci" in the girl's narrative.

"While (the girl) presented as a young witness trying her best to remember, the question of whether a complainant is unusually convincing must be premised on the reliability of the evidence," said the judge.

She added that the presumption of innocence means that doubt must be weighed in favour of the defence.

Citing the frailty of human memory and how the passage of time may have made recollection difficult, the judge stressed that an expeditious trial is pivotal in sex abuse cases.

The man looked relieved and happy when he heard the outcome, and his lawyers also appeared delighted.

Asked if they would appeal the outcome, the prosecution said they would look at the grounds of decision before deciding.