Man gets jail for lying he was not the driver in accident that killed delivery rider

Tan walked from his home to the accident scene.

A while later, when the traffic police arrived, Teo and his girlfriend claimed they did not know who had driven the car.

Teo said he was not the driver. Tan then approached the investigation officer and lied that he had been driving at the time, in order to shield Teo from any criminal responsibility.

Teo heard what Tan had said and knew it would mislead investigations, but decided to maintain the falsehood.

From preliminary investigations, the investigation officer was unable to determine with certainty who the actual driver was.

Furthermore, all three occupants of the car had failed their breathalyser tests. A decision was made to arrest them for drink driving and careless driving.

At about 7am on Sep 28, 2022, Teo maintained the falsehood during statement recording that Tan was the driver.

Tan later admitted to the investigation officer that he had lied and that Teo was the actual driver. Teo then later admitted this in a further statement.

Tan pleaded guilty to a similar charge in March and was given three weeks’ jail.

The prosecution sought five to six weeks’ jail for Teo, noting that the fact that he was not charged with any offence under the Road Traffic Act “does not in any way detract his culpability”.

Instead, Teo had “deliberately lied with full awareness that this could potentially hinder the police’s investigations into his criminal liability for the accident”, said Deputy Public Prosecutor Mohamed Riasudeen.

The police had separately told the coroner’s court that there was insufficient evidence to show that Teo had caused the fatal accident.

He was not charged with driving causing death nor drink driving. By the time he took a second breathalyser test at the traffic police’s headquarters, his breath alcohol levels were far below the legal limit.

Teo’s lawyer, Mr Gogulakannan Suppayya, said this was not a planned move to obstruct justice, but a “spontaneous, foolish decision” by his client.

In sentencing, the judge told Teo that he was more culpable than Tan, as he “started the whole thing” in a sense and said he was not the driver.

Tan was also the first to come clean.

For obstructing justice, he could have been jailed for up to seven years, fined, or both.