‘Highly gullible’ woman acted as money mule; court rejects mental condition arguments

Around January 2022, Yeong opened a new bank account which she handed over to Harry. A total of S$8,000 linked to scam proceeds was detected in this account.

Yeong received S$5,000 for her assistance.

She was represented by Mr Yip Jian Yang from Pro Bono Sg and asserted that she suffered from mental conditions that had contributed to her offending.

The defence presented two psychiatric reports dated December 2023 and October 2025.

The 2023 report stated that her intelligence was below average compared to her peers and she was considered a “slow learner”.

“She has a concrete thinking style, and likely struggled to understand more abstract concepts such as money laundering,” the report read. 

“While she had suspicions that what she was doing might get her into trouble and eventually understood the nature of her alleged offences, she might not have fully considered or understood the consequences and implications of her actions at the time,” the report read.

It added that Yeong showed similar poor judgment in her decision to continue sending money to her brother, despite her inability to fund her own daily expenses. The report said this suggests a “concrete and simplistic” interpretation of her father’s final instructions to take care of her brother.

The report also said Yeong likely has personality traits and “difficult life experiences” that made her vulnerable to manipulation.

“She displayed immense deference to her father’s wishes and brother’s needs at great cost to herself, (which) suggested that she has dependent personality traits,” the report read.

“These traits were most prominent when she related to male figures in her life such as her father, late husband, and brother. She showed a pattern of relying on significant male others to make decisions on her behalf.”

The report concluded that although Yeong knew what she was doing and could distinguish between right and wrong, the foregoing narrative indicated that she was “susceptible to adverse influence by others who judged that she’s highly gullible”.

The 2025 report said Yeong’s low IQ diminished her culpability because she was vulnerable to manipulation and “susceptible to malicious actors”, and that it was unlikely that she had adequate insight into her judgment and reasoning at the time.

The report said her condition was “not treatable” and that she would need assistance and guidance in managing her social interactions, managing finances and making choices in her best interest.

JUDGE’S FINDINGS

District Judge Samuel Wee found that the “conditions” raised by Yeong appeared to be personality traits, characteristics or symptoms of a possible mental condition or disorder, rather than recognised mental conditions in their own right.

He therefore agreed with the prosecution that the conditions did not appear to constitute mental conditions under the law.

Instead, they were “nothing more than speculative conditions” which are not a diagnosed mental condition.

In any event, no causal link was established between the conditions and the commission of the offences, said Judge Wee.

He added that the reports stated conclusions without setting out the underlying evidence and analytical process, such as by showing how the conditions affected Yeong at the time.

“In the absence of such explanation, the medical reports contain seemingly contradictory statements: the 2023 report states ‘she had suspicions that what she was doing might get her into trouble’ and ‘she knew what she was doing and can distinguish between right and wrong’; yet the 2025 report states ‘it is unlikely that she (had) adequate insight into her judgment and reasoning at the time of the alleged offences’,” said Judge Wee.

He added that there was also no indication that Harry was a “significant male other” with the effect of her developing reliance on him.

Yeong had cited her personal circumstances in mitigation, such as the hardship she faced after her parents and husband died, her brother’s alleged abuse of her financial generosity towards him and her own alleged financial losses as she was a scam victim herself.

Judge Wee said these are not mitigating factors.

Yeong has lodged an appeal against her sentence.