Groomsman found guilty of sexually assaulting bride on wedding night

SINGAPORE: After a night of drinking, a groomsman sexually assaulted the bride of his close friend in the bridal suite on the couple's wedding night.

The offender was convicted on Monday (May 30) after contesting two charges of sexual assault and using criminal force to outrage the woman's modesty at trial.

The identities of the offender and victim are protected by gag order. Details of the wedding, which took place in 2016, are not published as they could lead to identification of the parties involved.

The court heard that the victim and her husband have since divorced.

The offender, now in his 40s, was part of a group of groomsmen and bridesmaids who were invited to an after-party in the couple's bridal suite when the banquet ended.

Alcohol was available during the meal, and the group ordered and consumed more alcohol while in the suite.

Around 1am, the victim felt tired and left to shower and was alone in the bedroom while the group stayed in the living room.

The after-party ended at about 3am with everyone leaving except for the accused and victim's husband, who had fallen asleep in the living room.

Principal District Judge Victor Yeo said the main issues at trial were the facts of what had happened, and said that he believed the victim's testimony over the offender's.

VICTIM'S TESTIMONY

At trial, Deputy Public Prosecutors Ng Yiwen and Goh Yong Ngee argued that at about 6am, the victim woke up and felt she was being touched at her chest and private part.

She thought it was her husband and spoke to him, asking him to shower and sleep on the left side of the bed that she had left empty for him.

After each time she spoke, there was no response and the touching would momentarily stop before resuming.

The woman thought that the person might not be her husband as she felt the texture of jeans, which was not what he wore at the banquet.

However, she did not say anything as she did not think anyone besides her husband was in the bedroom with her.

After some time, she began to think that something was amiss and tried to look but the room was very dark and she could not see the person's face clearly.

The offender did not reply when she asked him to identify himself, and the victim became scared. Leaving the bedroom, she saw her husband in the living room and woke him up.

At that moment, the offender came out of the bedroom and started talking to the victim's husband. The victim saw that he was shirtless and wearing jeans.

She later confronted the offender and accused him of touching her.

The offender initially denied this, then later admitted to the victim's husband that he had touched her chest but not her private part.

The victim's husband told the offender to leave and the victim decided to make a police report.

OFFENDER'S TESTIMONY

Defence lawyers Edmond Pereira and Jessica Cheung argued that the offender believed he had woken up in his own bed at home.

He admitted to touching the victim's chest, saying that he had mistaken her for his wife. However, he denied sexually assaulting her.

The man claimed to have immediately retracted his hand when he heard the victim, which did not sound like his wife.

When he got out of bed and turned around, he said he was shocked to see that the person next to him was the victim.

He claimed that he went to the living room, where he woke the groom up and said he was sorry he had touched the victim's chest as he thought he was at home.

The man said he then left for home after he had put on his clothes and the groom told him he would settle the matter.

"DESPERATE EXCUSE"

Judge Yeo said the offender's account of events was a "desperate excuse" conceived retroactively to explain his actions, and that his defence of mistaking the victim for his wife was "unbelievable".

If the offender believed he was at home, then he failed to explain why he deviated from his usual practice of sleeping on the floor instead of the bed if he had not showered, said the judge.

The offender's claim that the sounds he heard from the victim was also "clearly a fabrication" that differed from her evidence, said Judge Yeo.

Additionally, the man's behaviour with the groom in the living room after the incident was more consistent with guilt, and the offender was "clearly trying to portray that he had owned up to his error immediately".

In contrast, the victim was a credible and honest witness, whose account of events was "unwavering". It was also consistent and corroborated by evidence from her then husband, said Judge Yeo.

This made her evidence "unusually convincing", and meant the prosecution had proven its case beyond reasonable doubt, said the judge.

The offender, who has a prior conviction for distributing uncensored films, will return to court for sentencing in July.

The punishment for sexually penetrating another person without consent is punishable with up to 20 years' jail and a fine or caning.

The penalty for using criminal force to outrage a person's modesty is up to two years' jail, a fine, caning or any combination of these punishments.