Young money mules involved in scams need measured sentences, more education: Lawyers

According to the guidelines, fines, probation and community sentences are generally not appropriate for scam-related offences, and imprisonment or RT should be considered.

RT leaves a criminal record, unlike probation and other community-based sentences.

Mr Anil Singh from Kertar & Sandhu said he has seen more young money mules being sentenced to RT.

Cautioning against a blanket approach to punishment which risks overlooking the circumstances of young offenders, he added that some young people are driven by financial circumstances or peer influence, or are deceived into giving up their bank accounts.

He said: “They are often unaware of the seriousness of these offences, or what even constitutes a scam-related offence.”

Harsher sentences with a deterrence effect, such as RT, take the young offender away from their family and the community and, in some cases, disrupt their education, he added.

Mr James Gomez from Edmond Pereira Law Corporation questioned the equity of young offenders who commit violent offences, like voluntarily causing hurt, being eligible for probation, while money mules are likely to be sentenced to RT.

He said rigid sentencing guidelines may displace the traditional principle of rehabilitation for youth offenders.

Mr Gomez added: “I think you are gearing society… right towards a culture where youth offenders no longer get that level of humanity from the courts that they ought to get.”

Ms Tanaya Shekhar Kinjavdekar of Trident Law said caning would not be imposed against young offenders sentenced to RT. But she added that the new laws essentially signal that Parliament is taking a firmer stance against scam-related offences, and the courts and prosecution would likely align themselves to this policy shift.

She said: “This could make it more challenging for young money mules to seek leniency from the prosecution at the investigations and charging stage, and before the court during sentencing.”

Two young money mules told ST in October they were swayed by the promise of easy money for a seemingly innocuous transaction involving banking details.

In 2023, Ethan hung out frequently with his friends as he had a strained relationship with his parents. He heard about selling bank accounts from a close friend.

His friend’s contact did not say what the accounts would be used for, but promised him $1,500 per account.

Ethan said at the time he had not heard news stories of money mules being caught and punished.

He added: “They said there was no risk, and I thought ‘free money, sure’.”

But the contact did not pay him and became uncontactable.

Kiran (not his real name), 20, came from a single-parent family, and wanted to pay his own bills to ease his mother’s burden while he was studying at the Institute of Technical Education (ITE).

In 2024, he saw a message about the chance to earn fast money in a group chat with other ITE students, and decided to set up and sell two bank accounts for $2,000.

Kiran believed he may have flouted the law but said he was willing to risk being jailed, adding: “I really needed the money, so I didn’t think twice.”

He was handed five criminal charges. He will next appear in court in end-November.

Ms Victoria Ting, associate director at Setia Law, said RT still allows for rehabilitation within a structured setting, and the guidelines accommodate both the seriousness of the crime and the offender’s capacity for reform.

She added: “The reality is that scams have become endemic and syndicated. The tough stance reflects society’s frustration with how pervasive these crimes have become, and the need to stamp them out decisively.”

Mr John Lim, managing director at LIMN Law Corporation, said public sentiment should not be at the expense of the rule of law, and young offenders should not think their age is a “get-out-of-jail-free card”.

“If you are 16 and old enough to open a bank account but decided to relinquish control to money mules, you are old enough to face the consequences of your actions,” he added.

But Mr Singh disagreed, and called for a greater emphasis on preventive education for young people, and a more measured approach in sentencing young offenders, such as imposing community-based sentencing options.

In June, District Judge Kessler Soh ordered an 18-year-old money mule to undergo a day reporting order, perform community service, and to be detained in prison for seven days instead of RT.

The girl handed two bank accounts to her friend for $500, and more than $64,000 in scam proceeds were transferred through the accounts.

Judge Soh wrote in his judgment: “I accepted that it could be attributed to her youthful folly and naivete in being induced by her friend’s offer of fast cash.”

He noted that she had good prospects at rehabilitation in the community and did not require a rigorous and structured environment for her rehabilitation. He described RT as a relatively harsh sentence which would scar her for life with a criminal record.

Both Ethan and Kiran said more education on money mule crimes and knowledge of the severity of the consequences would have helped to stop them from selling their bank accounts.

During the Parliament debate on Nov 4, Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs Sim Ann said introducing stiff penalties is not the only anti-scam measure the Government employs.

She added that it takes a whole-of-society approach that includes using technology and running public education programmes to teach youth about the consequences of facilitating scams.

Ethan and Kiran are currently undergoing therapy to understand the causes of their offending behaviour and reconcile with their families.

Their parents were shocked by their involvement in crime but have decided to support them.

Kiran now juggles two jobs while studying, while Ethan regularly helps out at his father’s hawker stall.

When asked what he would tell others tempted by the promise of easy money, Ethan said: “If you are going to (RTC), it is not worth it. Think carefully before making the choice.”