‘Predator’ who paid 13-year-old girls for sex gets jail and caning for statutory rape

THE SECOND VICTIM

Tan met the second victim, also 13, on Omegle before Sep 8, 2022.

She quoted a fee of S$400 to meet for sex acts, and went to Tan’s house where they had sex.

He paid her and they met again for sex in a toilet near Tebing Lane on Sep 18, 2022. This time, Tan paid her S$500.

They met a third time at Tan’s house on Dec 15, 2022. However, after this, Tan texted the girl asking for his electronic vaporiser and told her to “watch out”, saying he would take his friends to beat her up.

The second victim blocked Tan and deleted her messages with him after this.

THE THIRD VICTIM

On Jul 7, 2023, Tan got to know the third victim on Omegle and shifted the conversation to Telegram.

He asked to meet her for paid sex and later discussed details of sex acts with her, offering S$500.

They exchanged nudes and the girl told him she was 13.

Tan met the girl near her house on Jul 7, 2023, and they headed to a staircase landing of a Housing Board block past midnight where they engaged in sexual acts.

While Tan was raping the girl, an unidentified man walked past and asked them what they were doing.

The pair ran up the stairs to another floor before returning to collect their belongings later and heading to another floor where they continued their sex acts.

The next day, Tan contacted the third victim for sex again, but she rejected him, saying she was not free.

A few weeks later, she told Tan that she had spoken to the police and told him to stop contacting her.

Tan deleted his Telegram messages with the third victim and was later arrested in early August 2023.

Investigations subsequently revealed that he kept a diary detailing his expenses for paid sex with 17 girls.

SENTENCING ARGUMENTS

Deputy Public Prosecutor Jordon Li sought 23-and-a-half to 27-and-a-half years’ jail and 24 strokes of the cane for Tan, whom he labelled a “sexual predator”.

He said Tan was “an incorrigible sexual offender” who offered financial incentives to three victims below 14 years of age in exchange for sex acts.

He had engaged in multiple acts of penetration with the three victims across eight occasions spanning a period of a year and four months, exploiting them to satiate his own lustful desires, said Mr Li.

Tan was represented by Mr William da Silva, who argued that the factual matrix of the case was essentially that of commercial sex with a minor.

This is a separate offence with a lower maximum sentence than statutory rape.

Mr da Silva argued that while his client took advantage of young girls below the legal age, this was within the context of commercial sex, with the three girls advertising their sexual services.

He said the website they did it on caters for young girls, “shockingly and morally reprehensible though it is”, and even “more reprehensible for men taking advantage of those services”, but stressed that this was within a commercial context.

He said Tan had been law-abiding all his life until now. He said his client is 28 and the sentence proposed by the prosecution is crushing as he will be in jail for almost the entire duration of his life to date, for offences “where the criminality doesn’t reach that level”.

He sought 14 years’ jail and 12 strokes of the cane instead, questioning if the prosecution has seen the result of even 12 strokes of the cane on a human body.

“I have seen once, nine strokes. It was not a pretty sight,” said Mr da Silva. “The scars were still there after more than a year. I have no doubt, at nine strokes, his flesh would have been strewn all over the floor. Twelve strokes for my client is not a light sentence.”

He said Tan’s last job was as a waiter and he was just “an average, harmless, mostly harmless guy”.

The prosecution disagreed with the defence’s characterisation of the case. He said this was not a case where Tan unreservedly admitted his acts to the police, but where he had kept a detailed diary.

“He knew that the game was up,” said Mr Li. “The fact that there’s a commercial sex element cannot be mitigating.”

He said consent is “irrelevant” when it comes to minors under 14, and a commercial sex element is instead highly aggravating.

“It would be absurd for us to accept that just because there’s a lesser offence it can fall into, somehow it imposes limits on the sentence to be imposed,” said Mr Li.

Mr da Silva said his client now understands that the victims, due to their age, did not have the maturity to grasp the meaning and effects of their decisions.

“He now realises he was wrong to treat them as if they were adult sex workers,” said the lawyer.

He said the onus was on Tan to exercise restraint with regard to his own “carnality”, but he failed to do so.

This he attributed to Tan’s youth and immaturity, adding that “basically he was sucked into this whole sex and pleasure lifestyle”.

JUDGE’S FINDINGS

Justice Andre Maniam said he did not accept the defence’s argument that the introduction of an offence of paid commercial sex with a minor is an indication that commercial sex is less blameworthy than non-commercial sex.

He said commercial sex with a minor is an aggravating factor in a case like the present one, where there is an existing offence of statutory rape, and the question is how the court should reckon statutory rape where the offender has paid for the sex in question.

He said the fact that Tan offered financial rewards to entice the victims to have sex with him is an aggravating factor, and that his conduct demonstrated predatory behaviour.

The judge considered whether the total sentencing would be crushing or should be moderated downwards in the circumstances, but said he did not consider that this should be done.

This is because of the nature of the offences, the period of time in which they were committed, the number of offences and the age of the victims.

Justice Maniam allowed Tan to speak to his family members who were in court before the offender was led away.

For each count of statutory rape, he could have been jailed for up to 20 years and fined or caned.