Teenage rapist to be jailed and caned after prosecution wins appeal against reformative training sentence

SINGAPORE: A young man who raped a 14-year-old girl when he was 16 will have to undergo an eight-year jail term and three strokes of the cane instead of reformative training, after the prosecution succeeded in their appeal on Friday (Sep 6).

Prosecutors had appealed against the sentence of a minimum 12 months' reformative training for the young man, now 20, arguing that rape was the most serious of sexual offences and that his youth should not be at the forefront of considerations.

The Court of Appeal, comprising Justices Tay Yong Kwang, Steven Chong and Debbie Ong, agreed with the prosecution.

Delivering the verdict after a morning of arguments, Justice Tay said the court is ordinarily willing to consider a rehabilitative sentence of reformative training or even probation where a 16-year-old rapes a 14-year-old.

"However, the accused was no ordinary 16-year-old," said the judge. 

He said the young man had a string of theft offences from age 13, stealing bicycles, electric scooters and batteries.

He had reoffended by stealing when he was on bail for theft charges. While out on a higher bail amount, he committed the rape offence on Jun 27, 2020, raping his schoolmate in a toilet for the disabled while her boyfriend held her down.

"He was warned that if he committed new offences, there will be no more bail," said Justice Tay. "The re-arrest and warning had no effect at all on him, because he went on to commit the present rape offence and two more thefts."

Because the rape offence came to light only in February 2021, the offender was sentenced to his first stint of reformative training (RT) for his theft offences in October 2020.

"It is true that when the accused committed the rape on Jun 27, 2020, he had not undergone the first RT yet," said Justice Tay.

"And so it cannot be said that RT had no effect on his criminal tendencies - nevertheless, his history of offences and his complete disregard or defiance of the law shows that rehabilitation is not the best option here."

Justice Tay said the young man had raped a 14-year-old schoolmate who was obviously intoxicated and unwilling, and that he did so "with abandon" without protection.

"Specific deterrence is clearly called for to inject some fear and respect for the law into this young man, and this should be expressed in terms of imprisonment and caning," said Justice Tay.

BACKGROUND OF THE CASE

The offender was sentenced to reformative training with a minimum detention period of a year in January, after pleading guilty to one count of rape.

Justice Pang Khang Chau told him at the time that "this is your last chance".

All parties cannot be named to protect the victim's identity.

The offender had gone to Admiralty Park to join the victim and her boyfriend after seeing on social media that they were having a drinking session there.

While the girl was throwing up in the public toilet, her boyfriend and the offender went to look for her.

The offender suddenly threw her jacket over her face and held it there before raping the girl while her boyfriend held her down.

The boyfriend later blamed the girl for having sex with the offender, and she broke up with him. Her mother later lodged a police report.

The boyfriend was charged with abetting rape.

ARGUMENTS BY PROSECUTION AND DEFENCE

Deputy Public Prosecutors Yvonne Poon and Sheldon Lim on Friday argued for the reformative training to be replaced with eight to 10 years' jail and six to eight strokes of the cane.

Ms Poon said youth alone is "no guarantee" that rehabilitative principles should be at the forefront of a court's sentencing considerations.

"There are offenders that come before this court where elements of deterrence and punishment must take precedence, and we submit this is the case," she said.

She said rape was the gravest of all sexual offences, and cited three aggravating factors in this case: The victim's vulnerability in terms of her age and intoxication, the group element of the attack, and the fact that no condom was used.

She said that while the offender had not rendered the victim vulnerable through alcohol, he "certainly exploited that vulnerability thereafter".

It was clear that the victim was inebriated and not in physical control of herself, being unable to hold herself up on the e-scooter, said Ms Poon.

Defence lawyers Mato Kotwani and Wong Min Hui from PDLegal argued against the prosecution's submissions, but said if a jail term had to be imposed, not more than seven-and-a-half years' jail should be given, along with four strokes of the cane.

Mr Kotwani said he did not deny that rape is the most serious sexual offence, and that inherently, rape is a serious offence.

However, he said the severity of rape offences can "vary across a wide spectrum".

He argued that his client only sexually assaulted the victim because he was invited multiple times by her boyfriend to do so.

Justice Chong said the offender might have been initially reluctant.

"But I find it difficult to accept that he was coerced, or he did it out of fear. He was definitely encouraged, but he accepted the encouragement. He responded to it. Otherwise, we won't be here," said the judge.

THE VICTIM-BLAMING

He asked the defence to address the court on the alleged victim-blaming by the young man.

"That, to me, is important, because you are not a suitable candidate for rehabilitation if you don't take responsibility for your own actions and seek to attribute some blame to the victim," said Justice Chong.

The prosecution's allegations that the young man had engaged in victim-blaming came from the report assessing his suitability for reformative training.

Mr Kotwani said the statements his client had made came from a "historical perspective" - that is, he was telling the interviewer his views in the past.

The offender had given the interviewer a historical perspective about various elements including his poor academics, his alcohol and drug problems and how he stole as "saving money takes very long".

"When we come to attitude and orientation for the current offence, we see that the author writes - he presented attitudes that minimise responsibility for his actions," said Mr Kotwani.

"What we don't have are the specific questions and answers asked by the author. I think having gone through the interview process, the need to explain why he did certain things in the past, it's very plausible that he could very well have been giving the perspective (of) this is why I committed these actions in the past," said the lawyer.

Justice Chong pointed to a section of the report, where the author said the young man had "minimised the impact of the crime on the victim and shifted the blame to the victim".

The offender had said the victim appeared to be "enjoying" herself.

"If you say this is historical, it would mean that what he agreed to in the statement of facts is false, because in the statement of facts, he says she did not consent," said Justice Chong. "To say she was enjoying the sexual act ... you can't have it both ways."

He added that nowhere did the offender say "I was wrong" in forming that view.

Mr Kotwani pointed to another section where his client acknowledged that it was wrong of him to have engaged in sexual intercourse with the victim. It would be odd that he started off acknowledging this but later to blame the victim, he said.

"No, it's trying to minimise his blameworthiness, obviously," replied Justice Chong.

The defence lawyer then urged the court to consider his client's conduct throughout proceedings - he had cooperated, was candid and pleaded guilty very early.

"I think all of this counts for something, and it shows that he is in fact remorseful and he accepts what he did was wrong," said Mr Kotwani.

"So we have a situation where we have to weigh his entire conduct with some statements he made during the interview process - and we submit that there is some degree of doubt as to the accuracy of what was said and what was interpreted."

Justice Chong told Mr Kotwani that "we've got to take the report as it is and draw the appropriate inferences", and that it was "not fair" to cast doubt on the accuracy of the report at this point.

Had the defence taken the position that there was doubt on the accuracy of the report, they could have asked for a Newton hearing - a hearing to decide on contested issues - and the officer who wrote the report could have been produced in court.

Pressing on, Mr Kotwani said age is "a very important factor" and said the lack of maturity young offenders have is shown in how they think and behave in a certain way, "and that's the very reason why reformation is so important".

The prosecutor, Ms Poon, responded on the victim-blaming arguments and said there was one clear paragraph in the RT report to show it was not historical.

In the report, the offender had talked about how the victim continued to hang out with him and presented her in a negative light in terms of how she dressed and slept on the same bed as him and his girlfriend.

"These portions have nothing to do with the commission of the offence. They relate to his attitude held after the commission of the offence," said Ms Poon.

"For him to still hold these views and bring these up after he had pleaded guilty and unreservedly apologised ... shows he is indeed hardened and did not internalise any remorse or accountability of his actions at all."

When the verdict was read out, the offender appeared sad. He looked at his family members, who had come to court to support him.

He was allowed to begin his jail term three weeks later on Sep 27, as he has to help his family after a fire broke out at their flat on Aug 27.

Initially, Justice Tay asked why his five siblings could not help instead, but the judges granted the deferment after Mr Kotwani explained that his client's older sister was married, his brother was serving national service and his younger sisters are still schooling.

Until then, the offender remains out on bail of S$10,000.