NUS graduate pleads guilty to taking photos of two female students showering in hostel toilet

SINGAPORE — In yet another case of voyeurism on a university campus, a 25-year-old former National University of Singapore (NUS) student on Friday (Feb 28) admitted taking photographs of two female students showering in a residential hall women’s toilet.

Ryan You Jun Chao, whose offences took place when he was an NUS student last year, was the subject of disciplinary sanctions "including suspension, deferred graduation, mandatory counselling and rehabilitation sessions", an NUS spokesperson told TODAY on Friday

You has served the sanctions and has graduated, the spokesperson added.

On Thursday, a former junior college student also pleaded guilty to peeping at female students in toilets at NUS’ University Town.

On Friday, You’s lawyer Raphael Louis argued for his client to receive a short detention order or a fine. Offenders sentenced to the former will spend time behind bars but not have a criminal record.

The prosecution is seeking eight weeks’ jail for You. District Judge Adam Nakhoda adjourned sentencing until March 20, and You remains out on bail.

He pleaded guilty to two charges of insulting a woman’s modesty — an offence that carries a punishment of imprisonment for up to one year, a fine, or both. Another two charges of criminal trespass will be considered for sentencing.

TODAY has sought further comment from NUS in light of his guilty plea.

FELT TEMPTED TO CHECK WOMEN’S TOILET

The court heard that You committed his first offence on Valentine’s Day — Feb 14 — last year. He had woken up and “felt tempted” to see if anyone was showering in the common women’s toilet, Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Pavithra Ramkumar told the court.

When he walked by the toilet, he noticed that the main door was held open by a door stopper. He also heard sounds of someone showering.

He then entered the toilet, took out his mobile phone and held it over a cubicle partition to take photographs of the victim showering.

As he did so, she saw a shadow outside and looked up. He panicked and fled to the men’s toilet when she shouted and pushed his phone away.

This close shave did not stop him from striking again on March 5 last year.

Again, he felt tempted to check if there were women showering in the same toilet, so he walked there and found the main door held open by a stopper again.

He repeated his acts and successfully took the photos, then went to the pantry to check on the photos and returned to his room.

While showering, the victim had noticed a shadow outside the cubicle and some of You’s hair sticking out above the cubicle door.

“The victim wrapped herself in a towel and waited until others entered the common female toilet before she felt safe enough to continue showering. The victim finished her shower and left the common female toilet. She then noticed the accused at the pantry,” DPP Pavithra said.

After the incident, she began avoiding using that toilet.

The first victim lodged a police report on March 7 last year. Court documents did not state when and how You was nabbed.

You admitted to the authorities that he had deleted photos on various occasions before handing his mobile phone over for police investigations.

BREACHED BAIL CONDITION

While arguing for jail time for You, DPP Pavithra said that he was not a young offender and that he had “brazenly trespassed” into the women’s washroom. She pressed for a deterrent sentence “in light of an increasing number of voyeuristic offences, particularly in universities”.

She told the court that You also breached one of his bail conditions by telling his victims that he wanted to apologise to them.

“It is open to the accused to apologise in open court if he wishes to show his remorse. But as these are victims of sexual offences, there is no need to distress them further by communicating with them directly,” the prosecutor added.

In mitigation, Mr Louis said that You did not delete the photos while under police investigation, but did so because “he felt bad”.

“Is this a serious offence? Yes, it is. Does my client deserve to be punished? Yes, absolutely. Should he go to jail? I will say yes, sir — under the community-based sentencing regime,” the lawyer added.

You also started going for counselling sessions, has the support of his family and expressed his remorse at a “very early stage”, Mr Louis said.

He told District Judge Nakhoda: “Your Honour will note that he’s done well in school, and to that point, I’m not in any way suggesting that just because of his good grades, he should be given any special treatment. It’s just one of the many points that points towards rehabilitation.”