'License' to molest?

Categories: Singapore

A High Court judge had on appeal reduced a sentence meted out to a cancer-stricken molester from jail term of 4 months and 3 stroke of the cane for touching the breast and S$6000 for touching the backside to that of a mere S$5000 fine. This was after it was revealed that he had terminally-ill advanced neck cancer. Is this fair?

This molestation occurred in August last year when the unmarried man asked his maid whether he could touch her breasts while flashing a 50000 rupiah note (S$10). However before the maid could give an answer, he molested her. On several occasions that month, he also touched her on the buttocks.

The reasons cited for the reduced sentence was reported to be compassion because the presiding judge felt that the molester had suffered enough and wanted him to spend more of his remaining time with the family. The judge is indeed compassionate and is laudable. However should having a terminal cancer be used as a mitigating factor? It is true that the man is already serving a "sentence", but the cancer had not affected his mental faculty. Therefore, removing the neck cancer as a mitigating factor, he is no different from the next molester. If this is so, why should the jail sentence and cane be commuted to just one of fine? I do agree that because of his health, he should be spared the cane, just like what is stipulated in the law. Even with compassion which I readily agree, the jail sentence should not be spared but only reduced. A message has to be sent out that molest is a serious crime and warrants a jail sentence.

It is unfortunate that the judge failed to consider the feelings of the maid when making a judgement. This poor maid came to Singapore to make an honest living. Instead of being rewarded she was molested and insulted. If the man needed to satisfy his lust, he should go to one of the many other foreign women who will readily let him has his day for a fee. Why pick on one who is trying to etch out an honest living? There may be no physical harm, but mentally, she was abused. This episode has cut short her stay here and she had since gone home. It was not reported if she was compensated for her ordeal. Think of how much she can earn (by their country's standard) if she continued to work here. I do not know or understand what it is liked to be molested but I can imagine it cost much more than any monetary terms.

It is not that I lack compassion. I totally agree that sentencing should be laced with compassion. However, I felt that this case may set a precedent for future cases. What is there to stop a defence lawyer to quote this case for his HIV-client charged with molest? I am not a lawyer and I have no answer.