Teen given 21 months’ probation after deceiving peer into performing degrading acts

Fearing exposure, the victim complied with instructions to hide cash inside a book at a bookstore in Tampines Mall. The accused and the person he had shared the recordings with would then collect the money, splitting the proceeds. On one occasion, they collected S$100, of which S$20 was given to the other person.

Using the same method, the pair continued to collect money from the victim between July and December 2023. Across five occasions, S$2,450 was collected.

The victim lodged a police report on Jun 8, 2024, and the accused was arrested two days later. Court documents did not state how the victim discovered he had been deceived.

ACCUSED HAS POTENTIAL FOR REFORM

After the accused pleaded guilty, he was assessed for probation and reformative training.

Both are rehabilitative sentencing options. Under probation, a young offender is placed under the supervision of a probation officer for a period and must comply with conditions such as curfews. Probation does not result in a permanent criminal record.

A step up from probation is reformative training, which includes offenders being placed in a controlled environment with a structured schedule of activities for a period of time. This results in a criminal record.

On Monday, the court heard that the accused was found suitable for both probation and reformative training.

Deputy Public Prosecutor Stephen Yeo called for reformative training, stating that the need for deterrence in this case was “very clear”. The acts of cheating were “very depraved” and “unprovoked”, he said.

The accused was represented by lawyer Rohit Kumar Singh from Regal Law, who urged the court to grant his client probation. 

“The accused is truly remorseful for actions and regrets the offences he has committed … he is dedicated to improving himself following these incidents, by furthering his studies … and subsequently focusing on his National Service,” Mr Singh said.

“It’s been a while since I saw a probation report this positive. I urge your honour to give him a chance, and I assure you he will not waste this chance,” Mr Singh said, stressing the accused’s potential for reform. 

Despite having earlier expressed her reluctance to consider probation, District Judge Carol Ling decided to grant probation to the accused. 

As part of his probation, the youth must remain indoors from 10pm to 6am, perform 110 hours of community service and undergo counselling programmes as necessary.

His parents were also required to post a bond of S$5,000 to ensure their son’s good behaviour.

“Make no mistake, the offences are serious,” Judge Ling said in court.

She described the youth’s conduct as “highly reprehensible”, and said it showed a “complete lack of empathy” and total disregard for the victim. 

Noting the accused’s youth at the time of the offences, Judge Ling said young age alone could not always excuse one’s actions but found that there was room for rehabilitation in this case.

She noted that both the probation and reformative training reports were consistent in finding his risk of reoffending to be low, and that he had insight into his harmful behaviour and its effects. 

However, she warned the accused that if he reoffended or failed to comply with his probation conditions, the court could revoke probation and impose reformative training.

“Probation is not a get-out-of-jail card,” the judge said.

For cheating, an offender can be jailed up to three years, or fined, or both.

For extortion, an offender can be jailed between two and seven years, and caned.