High Court lays out sentencing benchmarks for molesters of children below 14
TODAY file photo
SINGAPORE — Issuing sentencing benchmarks for aggravated outrage of modesty cases involving children below 14, a High Court judge imposed a heftier jail term on a convicted molester.
Arguing a “significant uplift is necessary” for such offences, Justice See Kee Oon said benchmarks will help achieve a measure of consistency across various cases, and would ensure the full sentencing spectrum allowing a maximum jail term of five years is utilised.
In judgment grounds made public on Tuesday (Nov 21), Justice See dismissed the appeal by a 45-year-old Singaporean man, who had molested his 13-year-old niece, to have his 21-month jail sentence reduced. The man and his niece, who is now 16, cannot be named due to a court order.
The judge increased the man’s jail term to 25 months, shorter than the 27 months that the prosecution had argued for in a cross-appeal. There was no change to the four strokes of the cane meted out in the man’s original sentence.
The man, who is married with no children, had invited his niece over to his house on the afternoon of Feb 10, 2014, on the pretext that it would be more conducive for her to do her schoolwork. Her parents had been engaged in a domestic dispute the day before.
After his wife had gone to work, the man, who was sitting next to the girl on the sofa in the living room, fondled the girl’s breasts and touched her private parts. She had objected, but complied out of fear.
The man was first sentenced by a District Judge in May after a five-day trial.
Justice See said that the court should first ascertain three categories of aggravating factors, with the first being the degree of sexual exploitation. This includes assessing how and where the victim was molested and the duration of the act. For instance, the offence is more aggravated if there is skin-to-skin contact.
Other categories relate to the circumstances of the offence — such as the use of force or violence or the abuse of a position of trust — and the harm caused to the victim.
After the gravity of the offence has been ascertained, the court should then place it within three bands to determine the appropriate punishment.
Under the first band, which would stipulate a jail term of less than a year, cases would be at the “lowest end of the spectrum of seriousness”, with at most one aggravating factor. The cases may involve a fleeting touch, for instance.
Cases in the second band would be those with two or more aggravating factors and “nearly always” entail caning. The lowest end of the band would see cases with absence of skin-to-skin contact with the victims’ private parts, while those at the higher spectrum would involve skin contact with the victim’s private parts or sexual organs.
Imprisonment of one to three years should be considered, with a suggested starting point of at least three strokes of the cane, said Justice See.
The third band would see a three- to five-year jail term meted out, with a suggested starting point of six strokes of the cane.
Based on the aggravating factors in the present case, Justice See noted that the man’s conduct fell within the middle to upper range of the second band, with a sentence of at least 24 months. The sexual exploitation lasted for a “substantial period” and there was a degree of premeditation, as well as abuse of a position of trust, he noted.
