Suspended primary school teacher jailed for molesting student in HOD room in 'heinous betrayal'

SINGAPORE: A suspended primary school teacher who molested a schoolboy five times in a Head of Department room was sentenced to four years' jail on Friday (Sep 8).

In sentencing, Senior District Judge Bala Reddy said that educators hold "a position of unparalleled trust and influence in the lives of impressionable young children".

In Singapore, students spend a significant portion of their formative years within the school environment, he said. For school staff to breach the trust that parents have in them through sexual misconduct is "a heinous betrayal" and "a violation of the fundamental duty to protect and nurture these children", said Judge Reddy.

The victim, who was 10 or 11 at the time of the offences, had to testify as the teacher claimed trial, and said he failed his O-Level examinations as a result.

He came from a broken family and grew to confide in the teacher, a 44-year-old man. However, the teacher molested him instead, between November 2017 and October 2018.

The names of the school, the man and the victim cannot be published because of gag orders protecting the boy's identity.

The case came to light after the victim told his brother that the teacher had taken him to Sakae Sushi to celebrate his birthday.

The victim told his brother that the teacher was going to buy him a bicycle for his birthday, and the brother asked to see the man's photo.

After seeing the teacher’s WhatsApp profile picture, the brother commented on his appearance and asked the victim if the teacher had ever touched him.

The boy's silence and subsequent questioning by relatives led to a police report being lodged.

WITNESS TAMPERING ISSUE

At trial, the prosecution charged that the teacher had coached witnesses, including fellow teachers, on what to say. But the defence, Mr Gino Hardial Singh, objected to the prosecution's description of "witness tampering".

Judge Reddy laid out the sequence of events on this. Part of the teacher's bail conditions was to not have any contact with any prosecution witness.

However, he emailed a prosecution witness in June 2022 to ask her for documents to aid his case.

When Judge Reddy was alerted to this, he admonished the teacher and warned him against witness tampering. When the defence tried to explain his client's actions by saying he merely wanted to obtain some documents, the judge gave the accused the benefit of doubt and exercised his discretion not to increase or revoke bail.

Despite this, the teacher went on to contact another prosecution witness in January 2023, by texting her on WhatsApp and leaving her a birthday gift at her doorstep.

"In my view, this was indicative of the accused's lack of integrity and remorse; despite having been caught once, he nonchalantly persisted in his actions so that he could establish contact with a witness who was due to take the stand that very month," said Judge Reddy.

"I stop short of inferring any sinister motive on his part but find that his actions had irreparably damaged his trustworthiness."

He added that the teacher had attempted to interfere with and coordinate the evidence of four defence witnesses.

"Interestingly, it was the accused himself who had drawn attention to this conduct of his, when he sought to admit a screenshot of a text conversation," said Judge Reddy.

After some probing by the prosecutor, the accused admitted that he had obtained the screenshot while updating one of the witnesses named Ms J on the evidence being given by a prosecution witness.

"The court then learned that the accused had done this so that he could encourage Ms J to testify on certain matters in order to 'correct all the wrong that (the prosecution witness) had done'," said the judge, noting that Ms J was ultimately not called as a defence witness.

The accused's efforts in coordinating the evidence of two defence witnesses was uncovered after Deputy Public Prosecutor Lim Ying Min cross-examined them.

They admitted that they had sat through a "refresher" on Jun 18, 2022, where the accused reminded them on where he had been seated in 2018. 

"In other words, their evidence that the accused had been seated at the old cubicle in 2018 was nothing more than a parroting of what the accused had taught them, and I declined to accept their evidence," said the judge.

One of the offender's arguments at trial was that he could not have committed most of the offences as he was sitting at another cubicle, visible to people outside the glass door of the room.

Judge Reddy said he could not accept the entirety of the evidence given by two defence witnesses as he was "painfully aware" of the possibility that their memories might have been "subconsciously tainted" through months of close communication with the accused.

He added that it did not help that the full extent of the conversations were not available to the court, as the accused had "slyly arranged for them to delete the WhatsApp group chats in which they had discussed the evidence".

"I was of the view that the extent of the accused's cover-ups and lies had amounted to corroborative evidence of his guilt," said Judge Reddy.

Several of the lies were deliberate and motivated by "a realisation of guilt and a fear of the truth", said the judge.

These include the offender's claim that the victim had threatened to make false allegations of molestation against him in the presence of two other students.

This was proven false when the two students testified on the stand that no such threat had been made.

Another such lie was the man's claim that he had moved into the new cubicle in September 2018, which was contradicted not only by the prosecution witnesses but his own witnesses.

In calibrating the sentence, the judge carefully considered the emotional and psychological impact resulting directly from the offences, as well as several other factors.

He noted how the teacher had "conducted his defence in a disappointing manner, from conjuring belated defences to drip-feeding evidence as the trial progressed with little coherence to proper procedure".

"This disrespect for court procedure was aggravated by his stubborn attempts at contacting and communicating with various witnesses despite clear indications that he should not do so," said the judge.

"Whether or not the accused had meant for the witnesses to wilfully give false evidence in court, it was clear that he had at the very least meant to convince them to believe in his narrative and tailor the evidence in court in accordance with that belief," said the judge, finding that this was a "significant aggravating factor" warranting an uplift in the starting sentence.

Judge Reddy said young children in their formative years look up to role models including teachers.

"It is most regrettable when these mentors, to the contrary, become predators themselves and commit offences against our children," he said.

In a statement on Aug 28, a spokesperson for the Ministry of Education said the offender has been suspended from service since November 2018 and is no longer teaching in any school.

"MOE takes a serious view of staff misconduct and will not hesitate to take disciplinary action against those who fail to adhere to our standards of conduct and discipline, including dismissal from service," said the spokesperson.