Man, 77, gets jail for molesting granddaughter by licking her ear and stroking her back

SINGAPORE: A 77-year-old man asked his granddaughter to teach him how to use Microsoft Excel and molested her when he went to her home for the lesson.

The man, who cannot be named due to a gag order protecting the victim, was sentenced to five months and two weeks’ jail on Friday (Jul 24). He pleaded guilty to one count of assault or use of criminal force with intent to outrage modesty.

The court heard that the victim was 17 at the time of the offence. She called the accused, who is her biological maternal grandfather, “Nana”.

The victim and her family would visit the man at his residence at least once a week in 2019. The accused had never been alone with the victim before the incident.

Sometime before Aug 26, 2020, the man asked the victim if she could teach him how to use Microsoft Excel. After the victim agreed to do so, he visited her unit on one or two occasions to learn from her.

During those times, at least one other member of the household was present.

Around noon on Aug 28, 2020, the man visited the unit again for lessons. The victim and her elder sister, named as A1 in court documents, were at home while their parents and younger brother were at work and school respectively.

The man and the victim were seated side by side at the living room as she taught him how to use Excel. As A1 was leaving the unit to pick up her younger brother from school, the man asked her what time their parents would be back.

A1 then left at about 1pm, leaving the man alone with the victim.

At one point, the man asked the victim to close the living room door and after she sat back down, he placed his arm across the chair and stroked her back over her clothes.

The victim felt uncomfortable and pushed him away. He then asked for a hug. While hugging her, he again rubbed her back over her clothes and licked her ear.

While carrying out these acts, he told the victim that he had been “waiting a long time to do this”.

The victim panicked and pushed him away, before telling him to leave the house. But the man continued to remain in his seat and kept silent.

Overcome with fear, the victim sent her elder sister multiple messages via SMS, WhatsApp, Telegram and Snapchat, asking her to return home as soon as possible.

She also sent an audio message on WhatsApp telling her sister she was “scared”.

Her sister immediately rushed home after seeing the messages and returned to the unit with her younger brother. The accused had left the home by that time.

After the victim revealed what had happened, her sister wanted to inform their parents. But the victim told her not to do so as she was afraid their parents would not believe her.

Following the incident, the victim stopped talking to the man and he stopped coming to her home except during festive visits in 2021 and 2022.

VICTIM INFORMS PARENTS

During one such visit on May 4, 2022, the victim behaved coldly towards the accused and did not greet him. The man later told his wife about the victim’s behaviour. This prompted his wife to call the victim’s mother.

During the call, the accused’s wife mistakenly identified A1 as the one who did not greet her husband. The victim’s mother later spoke to A1 about this. Angered upon hearing the exchange, the victim then told her mother that she was the one who did not greet the accused.

She proceeded to disclose what had the accused had done. Her parents confronted the man that same day, and he replied: “Oh, that incident.” He lied to them that he had only placed his arm around the victim’s shoulder and did not touch her anywhere else.

At 1.22am the next day, the man messaged the victim’s father on WhatsApp, saying: “I’m really remorseful for (what) I have done to you (and) your family. Pls forgive me. I’m truly sorry.”

The victim lodged a police report with her parents on May 5, 2022 and the accused was arrested on Jan 5, 2026.

He was released on bail the same day and charged on Jan 8, 2026. He has been on bail since.

Deputy Public Prosecutor Hidayat Amir sought 8.5 months’ to 10.5 months’ jail for the accused. He argued that the degree of sexual exploitation has been fairly moderate, noting that the act of licking the victim’s ear was intrusive as it involved the use of saliva.

The man had also abused the victim’s trust in his capacity as the biological grandfather. Mr Hidayat said the man’s comments that he had been “waiting a long time to do this” was not said in vacuum and that the man had waited until the sister left the home to commit the offence.

The man, who was represented by defence lawyers from Invictus Law Corporation, argued for no more than five months’ jail. They argued that his offence was “opportunistic” and that it was a “one-off incident” which did not involve grooming.

The defence also pointed out that the man had a partial foot amputation and suffered from diabetes, and stressed that based on his advanced age and other medical complications, this should warrant a non-custodial sentence.

District Judge Andrew Tan asked the defence if they were ascertaining that the Singapore Prison Service was unable to manage the man’s medical condition. He also noted that on the very occasion that the accused was alone with the victim, the man said he had been “waiting a long time to do this”.

In response, the defence said they were not saying the prisons were unable to manage the man’s conditions but was instead highlighting that his present condition was active and unstable. “We would like to caution that there is a good chance that he might not be able to enjoy the same level of medical treatment” that he currently does, which includes roundabout care for his wounds, said the defence.

The defence also pointed out that this was “the first and only time that such an incident happened”, and there was no other manner of planning and premeditation.

In handing down the sentence, Judge Tan said the offence was “clearly premeditated” and that the man had taken the very first occasion when he was alone with the victim to commit the offence.

For assault or use of criminal force to a person with intent to outrage modesty, he could be jailed up to two years, fined, caned, or given any combination of these punishments.

Read Full Article At Source