Court dismisses Beef Bro co-founder’s appeal to overturn sentence for sexually assaulting sister’s drunk friend

SINGAPORE — The Court of Appeal on Wednesday (April 5) threw out an application by the co-founder of eatery chain Beef Bro to overturn his conviction and sentencing for molesting and sexually assaulting his sister’s friend.

Norvan Tan En Jie, 27, was sentenced by the High Court to nine years and 10 months’ jail and eight strokes of the cane on Aug 5, 2022. Tan, who had claimed trial, was convicted of two counts of sexual assault by penetration and two counts of molestation of a girl in the early hours of Dec 26, 2016.

The victim, who was 19 at that time of the incident, cannot be named due to a court order to protect her identity.

The appeal on Wednesday was heard by Justices Judith Prakash, Tay Yong Kwang and Steven Chong.

After the judges’ decision was delivered, Tan addressed the judges and begged them to “review the case one more time”, maintaining that he was innocent.

“Even if I were to do something like this, I wouldn’t do this in my own house,” said Tan.

Justice Prakash replied that the court has reviewed the case and is satisfied that the conviction is correct and cannot be set aside.

THE CASE

High Court judge Ang Cheng Hock had earlier found during the trial that Tan had sexually assaulted the victim on the living room sofa, his sister’s room and in the toilet that night.

The victim, who was intoxicated, had been out drinking on Christmas night with Tan’s sister, before the two went to Tan’s flat at about 5am.

Semen found on the T-shirt that the victim was wearing during the assault matched Tan's DNA. 

The defence argued that the semen could have been transferred from the surfaces of the toilet or wall, or from other clothes in the laundry basket where the T-shirt was seized by the police. But Justice Ang found this to be unconvincing.

Tan was 21 at the time.

The trial judge also found that Tan’s account of the event in his oral evidence during the trial was a “concocted” afterthought.

TAN MAINTAINED EVENTS DID NOT HAPPEN

On Wednesday, the defence led by Mr Eugene Thuraisingam said that Tan maintains that none of the events relating to the four charges had occurred.

The defence argued that the prosecution’s case rested on the victim's incomplete recollection of the events that night in light of her intoxicated state at the time of the event. They argued that the victim was also inconsistent in her evidence.

In the defence's written submissions, they noted that a psychiatrist from the Institute of Mental Health had testified during trial that when an intoxicated person suffers from gaps in their memory, the individual could fill in those gaps with other information.

Mr Thuraisingam also argued that Tan’s sister had lied when she told the victim that her brother had admitted to other family members about what he had done.

Mr Thuraisingam said that it should be up to the prosecution to prove that the semen found on the T-shirt that the victim was wearing had come from the assault.

The defence also appealed for a lower sentence should the apex court decide not to overturn the conviction.

The prosecution did not make any oral submissions in court on Wednesday.

VICTIM RESISTED EMBELLISHING HER ACCOUNT 

Delivering the apex court’s decision, Judge Prakash said that they found that the victim was a credible and truthful witness who was consistent in the main features in her account.

“And as the (trial) judge pointed out, she resisted embellishing it,” said Judge Prakash.

The judge said that the theory that the victim had made up the assault to fill in memory gaps “seems a stretch”, given she had already complained about the pains the moment she woke up. 

She was also weak and intoxicated during the night and would not have been in a position to make up stories of sexual assault, said the judge.

The judges also upheld Judge Ang's decision in impeaching the credibility of Tan’s sister and rejecting her oral evidence in court, where she claimed that she had lied in her police statement and to the victim when texting her about Tan’s partial admission.

This was because there was consistency in her WhatsApp messages with the victim, Tan and family members. The court found that Tan’s sister “was trying to ameliorate the consequences for the appellant”.

Judge Prakash also said the semen on the T-shirt was important corroboration.

It was “striking” that the complainant had not known about the semen on the T-shirt when making the allegations. Yet the fact that the semen was found on the exterior back of the clothing supports her assertion, said the judge.

On the other hand, Tan’s explanation of how else the semen could have gotten onto the T-shirt was “contrived”.

The judge said that some details of the event which the victim could not explain were “understandable” given the victim’s weak state at that time, adding that the victim’s messages with other witnesses and their testimonies largely corroborated her account.

Judge Prakash said that the sentence meted out by the trial judge was not manifestly excessive, given that Tan was “opportunistic” and “predatory” in his actions.

The court granted Tan’s request to defer his sentence by a week and he will begin serving on April 12.