SINGAPORE: A woman got into a relationship with a man she hitched a ride from via a Telegram chat group, but later ended the relationship when she found out that he was going through a divorce, had another girlfriend and was a father.
However, the man would not let the relationship end and called her constantly, waiting below her block of flats to catch her leaving and assaulting her.
The man, now 37, claimed trial to three counts of voluntarily causing hurt to his ex-girlfriend over three occasions in 2022 and one charge of stealing her phone at a nightclub.
He made several arguments in his own defence, including that he had drunk a spiked drink and could not control himself, that closed-circuit television (CCTV) footage depicting the assault must have been edited, and that the phone was bought using his company's funds, so it was therefore a company phone.
The judge found the man guilty of all four charges and sentenced him to 15 weeks' jail. The man is on bail pending appeal, according to a judgment made available on Friday (Sep 5).
He cannot be named due to a gag order protecting the victim's identity.
The prosecution's case rested mostly on the testimony of the victim, named only as Ms V.
She testified that she got to know the offender at the beginning of 2022 after hitching a ride from him via a group chat on Telegram.
They met a few times after that and entered into a romantic relationship.
However, Ms V later found out that the offender had not disclosed certain things to her, including that he was undergoing a divorce, had children, and had another girlfriend.
Around April 2022, she tried to end the relationship and avoided the man as much as possible. However, she said he would not let it end.
He called her constantly, using different numbers, which she blocked.
She said he "camped" below her block of flats to catch her leaving. When he spotted her leaving, he would snatch away her belongings, including many of her phones, in a bid to stop her from going to work or for her appointments.
When Ms V tried to take her belongings back, the pair would get into a dispute and he would assault her.
Eventually, she obtained a personal protection order against him in 2023 and things "started to cool down".
On Jul 22, 2022, Ms V had an early morning meeting to attend and did her habitual check before leaving her house to see if the man was waiting for her at the foot of her block.
She saw his car parked below, so she took a lift that was situated away from the main lift lobby in an attempt to avoid him.
However, he spotted her crossing the road to a bus stop and "dashed" towards her, snatching her bag and throwing it into his car before pulling her towards the vehicle.
As she was afraid to make a scene, Ms V got into the front passenger seat.
The man began driving, but his destination was unknown to Ms V. She said he was angry at not being able to contact her and called her a "hooker", a "prostitute" and "cheap".
He pulled her face mask, making it snap back against her face, hit her head and arms "really hard", twisted her hand and grabbed her breasts, leaving bruises.
Eventually, he drove to Raffles Marina in Tuas, stopped the car and waited for her to exit. Ms V asked him to return her phone to her, as she had an important meeting to attend, but the man refused and told her he had "a lot of time to waste".
He then turned off the engine, so the heat would force her to step out of the car, testified Ms V.
She later alighted and asked a security guard for help. He tried to calm them down and eventually called the police.
The offender, who represented himself in the trial, said that the woman had scratched him in the car and pushed his temple, causing his head to hit against the glass.
He claimed that while he had used "some force to suppress her", this was done "not out of violence but an attempt to contain the situation from going out of hand".
The judge accepted Ms V's account instead.
On Nov 23, 2022, Ms V said she met the offender because he had offered to buy her a new phone, as he had broken several of her old ones.
After buying the S$1,300 phone, they went for drinks on the offender's suggestion and had four to five bottles of wine together.
After this, Ms V asked the man to take her home, but he wanted to go to a hotel for sex instead. When Ms V repeated that she wanted to go home, the man confiscated the new phone and she followed him to his car as she felt "pressured".
The man drove to a hotel, arguing with Ms V on the way, she said.
She claimed that she begged the man to let her go home while in the lift. CCTV footage from the hotel showed the man dragging Ms V by her wrist out of the lift with "some force and speed", the judge noted.
She fell to the ground and landed on her hip, with her heels falling off. The man was seen speaking to her and taking her phone again. Ms V stood up and pressed a call button intending to leave, but the man pulled her by her wrist towards the hotel room.
Footage from the corridor outside the room showed Ms V striking the man repeatedly with one of her heels to make him release his grip on her wrist.
When Ms V tried to walk towards the lift, the man stopped her, pushed her towards the room and punched her face, causing her nose to bleed.
Ms V sank to her knees outside the room and started to cry, begging the man to let her off. He pulled her forcefully into the room, pushing her so she fell backwards on the bed, said Ms V.
At this point, hotel staff knocked on the room door and Ms V tried to get up, but the man pulled her back and punched her in the chest, she testified. The woman fell, feeling breathless.
The door opened and paramedics entered and took her to hospital. A medical report found bruises on her wrist, arms, chin, hip and knee. Her sternum or chest bone showed signs of a fracture, but she was discharged against medical advice.
In his defence, the man argued that he suspected that his drink had been spiked at the bar while he was in the toilet.
He said his body felt "weird" after only two sips of wine and he felt as if he was "under control", meaning he could not control his own actions.
Alarmed, he said he ran out of the bar with Ms V following him. He claimed that when he went to the hotel, he told the receptionist that he wanted to quickly hide in one of the rooms. Inside the room, he punched his own stomach and vomited, he claimed.
He did not deny the acts shown in the video footage, but claimed that he had acted "as a natural reflex" in his "state of pain" because the woman had continually clobbered the back of his head with her heels.
He repeatedly blamed the police for not taking him to hospital even though he had insisted on going, and stated that they did not take him to the station for a blood or urine test.
He also claimed that Ms V did not run away, call the police, or tell the receptionist that she did not want to go into the hotel room with him, asserting that she was lying to the court.
The judge found the evidence by the prosecution to be "overwhelming", with an internally consistent account from Ms V that was corroborated by CCTV footage.
She found the offender's defence of a spiked drink to be "speculative, fanciful and wholly without merit".
"His claim of not being in control of his actions was entirely at odds with his calm and collected demeanour in the extended interactions at the ... reception area," said District Judge Cheng Yuxi.
She noted that the offender "pivoted under cross examination to assert that the CCTV footages capturing his acts must have been tampered with".
Overall, his defences were "inconsistent and vacillating", said Judge Cheng.
A few days after the hotel incident, Ms V agreed to meet the offender because he said he knew a place that could extract the data from her old phone to the new one.
She met him for drinks with his friends, including a man called Alex, at the Capital at Zouk nightclub in Clarke Quay.
Ms V invited her friend to join them so she would "feel safer" and they could go home together later.
The group left the club after midnight on Nov 26, 2022. The offender insisted on sending Ms V home, but she refused. She said she wanted Alex to take her and her friend home instead.
At this, the offender snatched Ms V's phone.
This incident formed the basis of the theft charge. The offender's main defence was that the phone had been purchased with his company's funds, so it was a company phone.
He produced a tax invoice from the phone shop to a company he claimed was his. He also claimed that he wanted to investigate the company phone because he believed Ms V was involved in illicit activities involving drugs.
After the offender snatched Ms V's phone, he drove his car and blocked the exit of the car park as he had seen Ms V walking towards Alex's car.
He alighted and dragged Ms V towards his car, until he was stopped by Ms V's friend.
Ms V then boarded Alex's car with her friend, with the offender tailgating them all the way to the condominium where Ms V's friend stayed.
After this, the offender went to Alex's car to ask Ms V to get into his car instead. Alex wound down the front passenger window to tell the offender that he would be taking Ms V home instead.
The offender reached through the window, pulled Ms V's dress and punched her "very hard" on her face, causing it to swell, Ms V testified.
Alex alighted to stop the offender, but the offender opened the front passenger door and pulled Ms V out by her arms. She was hit against the car and dragged on the road, suffering cuts and bruises.
Ms V tried to push the offender away, and her friend returned to help. Eventually, the offender stopped and Ms V went back to Alex's car, crying.
Alex took Ms V home, with the offender tailgating his car all the way.
After Ms V was dropped off, the offender shouted at her and did not return her belongings, taunting her by telling her to "learn how to be a woman before you come back, talk to me". At home, Ms V said she sought help from her father and called the police.
The offender did not challenge any part of Ms V's testimony. He stated in closing submissions that he might have been forceful but denied any intention to cause hurt.
In his overall defence, the offender claimed that he had single-handedly brought down a person who was the mastermind of a cigarette-smuggling syndicate in 2020.
He claimed that the mastermind was wanted by the police, Singapore Customs and the Central Narcotics Bureau.
He said he tailgated the mastermind's car to Golden Sultan Plaza, where he confronted him while the mastermind was armed with a Samurai sword.
Eventually, armed policemen arrived and arrested the mastermind. As a result of this incident, the offender was convinced that syndicate members working under the mastermind wanted to take revenge on him.
He believed that Ms V, her friend and even an investigation officer were related to this syndicate.
The judge said the offender did not explain how this supposed incident was relevant to any of his charges, even though she asked him to state the relevance several times.
The offender had also alleged that several police officers were corrupt and that the prosecutor was biased, covered up evidence and had "no justice".
The judge said that by frequently raising scandalous allegations without any reasonable grounds, the man had only harmed his own case by demonstrating that he did not have a cogent defence and had to resort to accusing prosecution witnesses of unfounded conspiracies against him.
She sentenced him to 15 weeks' jail. The man will be appealing against his conviction and sentence and is on bail pending the appeal.
Continue reading...
However, the man would not let the relationship end and called her constantly, waiting below her block of flats to catch her leaving and assaulting her.
The man, now 37, claimed trial to three counts of voluntarily causing hurt to his ex-girlfriend over three occasions in 2022 and one charge of stealing her phone at a nightclub.
He made several arguments in his own defence, including that he had drunk a spiked drink and could not control himself, that closed-circuit television (CCTV) footage depicting the assault must have been edited, and that the phone was bought using his company's funds, so it was therefore a company phone.
The judge found the man guilty of all four charges and sentenced him to 15 weeks' jail. The man is on bail pending appeal, according to a judgment made available on Friday (Sep 5).
He cannot be named due to a gag order protecting the victim's identity.
THE CASE
The prosecution's case rested mostly on the testimony of the victim, named only as Ms V.
She testified that she got to know the offender at the beginning of 2022 after hitching a ride from him via a group chat on Telegram.
They met a few times after that and entered into a romantic relationship.
However, Ms V later found out that the offender had not disclosed certain things to her, including that he was undergoing a divorce, had children, and had another girlfriend.
Around April 2022, she tried to end the relationship and avoided the man as much as possible. However, she said he would not let it end.
He called her constantly, using different numbers, which she blocked.
She said he "camped" below her block of flats to catch her leaving. When he spotted her leaving, he would snatch away her belongings, including many of her phones, in a bid to stop her from going to work or for her appointments.
When Ms V tried to take her belongings back, the pair would get into a dispute and he would assault her.
Eventually, she obtained a personal protection order against him in 2023 and things "started to cool down".
THE ASSAULTS
On Jul 22, 2022, Ms V had an early morning meeting to attend and did her habitual check before leaving her house to see if the man was waiting for her at the foot of her block.
She saw his car parked below, so she took a lift that was situated away from the main lift lobby in an attempt to avoid him.
However, he spotted her crossing the road to a bus stop and "dashed" towards her, snatching her bag and throwing it into his car before pulling her towards the vehicle.
As she was afraid to make a scene, Ms V got into the front passenger seat.
The man began driving, but his destination was unknown to Ms V. She said he was angry at not being able to contact her and called her a "hooker", a "prostitute" and "cheap".
He pulled her face mask, making it snap back against her face, hit her head and arms "really hard", twisted her hand and grabbed her breasts, leaving bruises.
Eventually, he drove to Raffles Marina in Tuas, stopped the car and waited for her to exit. Ms V asked him to return her phone to her, as she had an important meeting to attend, but the man refused and told her he had "a lot of time to waste".
He then turned off the engine, so the heat would force her to step out of the car, testified Ms V.
She later alighted and asked a security guard for help. He tried to calm them down and eventually called the police.
NOT OUT OF VIOLENCE, OFFENDER CLAIMS
The offender, who represented himself in the trial, said that the woman had scratched him in the car and pushed his temple, causing his head to hit against the glass.
He claimed that while he had used "some force to suppress her", this was done "not out of violence but an attempt to contain the situation from going out of hand".
The judge accepted Ms V's account instead.
On Nov 23, 2022, Ms V said she met the offender because he had offered to buy her a new phone, as he had broken several of her old ones.
After buying the S$1,300 phone, they went for drinks on the offender's suggestion and had four to five bottles of wine together.
After this, Ms V asked the man to take her home, but he wanted to go to a hotel for sex instead. When Ms V repeated that she wanted to go home, the man confiscated the new phone and she followed him to his car as she felt "pressured".
The man drove to a hotel, arguing with Ms V on the way, she said.
She claimed that she begged the man to let her go home while in the lift. CCTV footage from the hotel showed the man dragging Ms V by her wrist out of the lift with "some force and speed", the judge noted.
She fell to the ground and landed on her hip, with her heels falling off. The man was seen speaking to her and taking her phone again. Ms V stood up and pressed a call button intending to leave, but the man pulled her by her wrist towards the hotel room.
Footage from the corridor outside the room showed Ms V striking the man repeatedly with one of her heels to make him release his grip on her wrist.
When Ms V tried to walk towards the lift, the man stopped her, pushed her towards the room and punched her face, causing her nose to bleed.
Ms V sank to her knees outside the room and started to cry, begging the man to let her off. He pulled her forcefully into the room, pushing her so she fell backwards on the bed, said Ms V.
At this point, hotel staff knocked on the room door and Ms V tried to get up, but the man pulled her back and punched her in the chest, she testified. The woman fell, feeling breathless.
The door opened and paramedics entered and took her to hospital. A medical report found bruises on her wrist, arms, chin, hip and knee. Her sternum or chest bone showed signs of a fracture, but she was discharged against medical advice.
DRINK SPIKED, OFFENDER CLAIMS
In his defence, the man argued that he suspected that his drink had been spiked at the bar while he was in the toilet.
He said his body felt "weird" after only two sips of wine and he felt as if he was "under control", meaning he could not control his own actions.
Alarmed, he said he ran out of the bar with Ms V following him. He claimed that when he went to the hotel, he told the receptionist that he wanted to quickly hide in one of the rooms. Inside the room, he punched his own stomach and vomited, he claimed.
He did not deny the acts shown in the video footage, but claimed that he had acted "as a natural reflex" in his "state of pain" because the woman had continually clobbered the back of his head with her heels.
He repeatedly blamed the police for not taking him to hospital even though he had insisted on going, and stated that they did not take him to the station for a blood or urine test.
He also claimed that Ms V did not run away, call the police, or tell the receptionist that she did not want to go into the hotel room with him, asserting that she was lying to the court.
The judge found the evidence by the prosecution to be "overwhelming", with an internally consistent account from Ms V that was corroborated by CCTV footage.
She found the offender's defence of a spiked drink to be "speculative, fanciful and wholly without merit".
"His claim of not being in control of his actions was entirely at odds with his calm and collected demeanour in the extended interactions at the ... reception area," said District Judge Cheng Yuxi.
She noted that the offender "pivoted under cross examination to assert that the CCTV footages capturing his acts must have been tampered with".
Overall, his defences were "inconsistent and vacillating", said Judge Cheng.
A few days after the hotel incident, Ms V agreed to meet the offender because he said he knew a place that could extract the data from her old phone to the new one.
She met him for drinks with his friends, including a man called Alex, at the Capital at Zouk nightclub in Clarke Quay.
Ms V invited her friend to join them so she would "feel safer" and they could go home together later.
The group left the club after midnight on Nov 26, 2022. The offender insisted on sending Ms V home, but she refused. She said she wanted Alex to take her and her friend home instead.
At this, the offender snatched Ms V's phone.
This incident formed the basis of the theft charge. The offender's main defence was that the phone had been purchased with his company's funds, so it was a company phone.
He produced a tax invoice from the phone shop to a company he claimed was his. He also claimed that he wanted to investigate the company phone because he believed Ms V was involved in illicit activities involving drugs.
After the offender snatched Ms V's phone, he drove his car and blocked the exit of the car park as he had seen Ms V walking towards Alex's car.
He alighted and dragged Ms V towards his car, until he was stopped by Ms V's friend.
Ms V then boarded Alex's car with her friend, with the offender tailgating them all the way to the condominium where Ms V's friend stayed.
After this, the offender went to Alex's car to ask Ms V to get into his car instead. Alex wound down the front passenger window to tell the offender that he would be taking Ms V home instead.
The offender reached through the window, pulled Ms V's dress and punched her "very hard" on her face, causing it to swell, Ms V testified.
Alex alighted to stop the offender, but the offender opened the front passenger door and pulled Ms V out by her arms. She was hit against the car and dragged on the road, suffering cuts and bruises.
Ms V tried to push the offender away, and her friend returned to help. Eventually, the offender stopped and Ms V went back to Alex's car, crying.
Alex took Ms V home, with the offender tailgating his car all the way.
After Ms V was dropped off, the offender shouted at her and did not return her belongings, taunting her by telling her to "learn how to be a woman before you come back, talk to me". At home, Ms V said she sought help from her father and called the police.
The offender did not challenge any part of Ms V's testimony. He stated in closing submissions that he might have been forceful but denied any intention to cause hurt.
In his overall defence, the offender claimed that he had single-handedly brought down a person who was the mastermind of a cigarette-smuggling syndicate in 2020.
He claimed that the mastermind was wanted by the police, Singapore Customs and the Central Narcotics Bureau.
He said he tailgated the mastermind's car to Golden Sultan Plaza, where he confronted him while the mastermind was armed with a Samurai sword.
Eventually, armed policemen arrived and arrested the mastermind. As a result of this incident, the offender was convinced that syndicate members working under the mastermind wanted to take revenge on him.
He believed that Ms V, her friend and even an investigation officer were related to this syndicate.
The judge said the offender did not explain how this supposed incident was relevant to any of his charges, even though she asked him to state the relevance several times.
The offender had also alleged that several police officers were corrupt and that the prosecutor was biased, covered up evidence and had "no justice".
The judge said that by frequently raising scandalous allegations without any reasonable grounds, the man had only harmed his own case by demonstrating that he did not have a cogent defence and had to resort to accusing prosecution witnesses of unfounded conspiracies against him.
She sentenced him to 15 weeks' jail. The man will be appealing against his conviction and sentence and is on bail pending the appeal.
Continue reading...