Reformative training for second youngest of 4 brothers who sexually abused sister
SINGAPORE — The second youngest of four brothers accused of sexually assaulting their sister was sentenced to a minimum of 12 months' reformative training on Wednesday (June 26).
- A 20-year-old man was sentenced to reformative training for sexually abusing his younger sister in 2020
- He is the second youngest of four brothers accused of committing the offences against the victim in their family home
- The biological sister was then aged between 10 and 11, and he was between 16 and 17 at the time
SINGAPORE — The second youngest of four brothers accused of sexually assaulting their sister was sentenced to a minimum of 12 months' reformative training on Wednesday (June 26).
He pleaded guilty on Feb 5 to one charge of aggravated sexual assault, with seven other charges taken into consideration for sentencing.
Reformative training is a comprehensive rehabilitation programme in the closed and structured environment of a reformative training centre. It is typically offered to young offenders between the age of 14 and 21, if they are found suitable.
After serving the 12-month term and completing the required rehabilitation programmes, the offender will be reviewed by a committee to determine his suitability for release under a supervision order.
The 20-year-old man, who was 16 or 17 when he sexually assaulted his sister, cannot be named due to a gag order to protect the victim's identity.
The offender's other brothers are now aged 23, 22 and 18 respectively.
The four brothers were between the ages of 13 and 21 when they committed the alleged offences against their sister between 2018 and 2022.
The victim, who is now 14, is the oldest among three sisters. She was aged between 10 and 11 and in Primary 5 at the time.
All seven children lived together with their parents in their family home, which had three bedrooms.
The boys stayed in a bedroom referred to in court documents as the "boys' room", while the girls shared the "girls' room".
The children's parents set ground rules that the boys were not to go into the girls' room, unless it was to comb their hair using the mirror there.
The reason for this rule was that the three girls were still young while the four boys were mature. Whenever the children's mother saw one of her sons in the girls' room, she would remind them not to stay inside.
However, the offender would go into the girls' room to rest and play games. It was also where the sexual assaults took place.
WHAT HAPPENED
The offender was the last among the four accused to sexually abuse his sister.
By the time he started, his other brothers had sexually assaulted the girl on at least one prior occasion, court documents showed.
Although the offender knew that his two older brothers had sexually assaulted his sister, he decided to "keep quiet".
In 2020, the offender decided to sexually assault the victim to "satisfy his sexual urges" and would molest her whenever he felt like it.
This happened no less than four times in the girls' room that year, despite him knowing that the girl did not consent to the sexual acts and would try to resist him.
On one occasion in 2020, he went to the girls' room, having already sexually assaulted her before that year.
He was alone with the victim at this time. He laid down next to her when she was lying on her bed and sexually assaulted her.
The girl told him not to touch her and tried to avoid him.
However, when her brother persisted, the girl "did not struggle further as she already knew what was going to happen and was afraid", court documents stated.
On Feb 10, 2022, the victim finally found the courage to inform her school of the sexual abuse.
The Ministry of Social and Family Development was alerted and a police report was made the same day.
The offender was arrested a day later.
He had initially denied the sexual assault when first confronted by the police but later admitted doing so on at least two occasions.
VICTIM BLAMED HERSELF
During the years of abuse, the victim did not dare to inform anybody of the incidents.
She would just pretend to be happy by putting on a fake smile although she was stressed and sad, the court heard.
After reporting the matter, she felt anxious and guilty, and would blame herself for not stopping her brothers when the abuse happened.
She was seen by a psychiatrist at the Child Guidance Clinic in May 2022 and she said that she had been feeling sad, confused, nervous, scared and angry since the abuse and kept thinking about it.
The psychiatrist said in a report that the victim would benefit from a safe, supportive environment and counselling.
The victim was also examined for sexual assault at the KK Women's and Children's Hospital.
The report found that she had likely had her first period at the age of 10, was not sexually active other than the assault, and did not have any sexually transmitted diseases.
In the February hearing, Deputy Public Prosecutors (DPPs) Muhamad Imaduddien, Lim Ying Min and M Kayal Pillay asked for eight to nine years' jail and 12 strokes of the cane for the offender.
However, defence counsel Ashvin Hariharan from law firm IRB Law asked for a reformative training suitability report to be prepared for his client.
In delivering her sentence on Wednesday, Justice Hoo Sheau Peng said that the accused was not a “hardened” offender, and that following the incidents in 2020, he did not engage in other acts of sexual assault and stopped such behaviours.
Justice Hoo added that the offender has been in remand for over two years, making it a sufficient deterrence.
The offender is the third brother to be dealt with in court.
On May 20, the oldest of the brothers was sentenced to 20 years’ jail and 24 strokes of the cane.
A day later, the second oldest brother was sentenced to 18 years’ jail and 24 strokes of the cane.
The remaining brother's case is still pending.
He pleaded guilty on March 12 to two counts of aggravated rape, with six other charges being taken into consideration for sentencing.
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article stated that the prosecution told the court it will be filing an appeal against the sentence. This is incorrect. The prosecution had made an application for a stay of the sentence to consider an appeal. The application was not granted. We are sorry for the error.