Woman testifies about mother of her adopted child allegedly stalking her, filing more than 100 false police reports

• A Singaporean woman, 43, is standing trial for stalking the woman who adopted her daughter
• The complainant testified about the troubles she and her husband faced since getting care and control of the girl in late 2013
• She alleged that the accused filed more than 100 false police reports against her
• The accused also allegedly posted their confidential details on social media
• During the first hour of the trial, a judge had to caution the accused not to keep interrupting 

SINGAPORE — A woman who adopted a little girl testified on Wednesday (Sept 15) about how the child’s biological mother had allegedly filed more than 100 false police reports against her and her husband, then stalked them by making various social media posts that divulged confidential personal details.

The woman, who has two grown children of her own, took the stand as a prosecution witness in the accused’s trial, which began in the State Courts on Tuesday.

Her husband allegedly had an affair with the accused, who then gave birth to the girl.

The accused, a 43-year-old Singaporean, faces one charge of stalking the complainant by making 32 posts on Facebook and Instagram about the couple between Dec 10, 2019 and Aug 23 last year.

Neither woman can be named due to a court order to protect the complainant’s identity. 

On Wednesday morning, District Judge Sarah Tan had to intervene at several points and once stopped the hearing for 10 minutes, when the accused — who was not represented by a lawyer — repeatedly objected to Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Hidayat Amir’s questions and shouted for her child to be given back to her. 

She ranted that it was “against the law to have adoptions”, and was crying and shouting. “Return my baby, you don’t have to accept her… How can you do this to me? I want my baby home. She’s my real baby,” she said at one point.

The complainant had testified that in November 2013, her husband first took the child home in a “neglected and abandoned state”. The child was then two years old.

The accused then retorted from the dock that she “cannot be an irresponsible mother” and did not give her daughter away.

The judge ultimately had to caution her to save her questions and statements for cross-examination, and not to express her hurt by “shouting your truth from where you are seated”.

District Judge Tan also warned that every instance of her shouting and wailing would be recorded, telling her not to repeatedly interrupt the proceedings.

ALLEGATIONS OF KIDNAP, RAPE

DPP Hidayat took the complainant through her version of events. She said that her husband, whom she married 28 years ago and who is occasionally stationed overseas for his job, knew the accused through a friend at a nightclub.

“This accused person ever mentioned to my husband that this child belongs to him. She told him, ‘If you don’t get a divorce, I will go to your wife and let her know and surely, she will divorce you’. This was the threat,” the complainant told the court.

“When my husband found out the child was abandoned and neglected, he thought he needed to bring this child back… On that day, (the accused) made a police report and mentioned that my husband kidnapped and raped the child.”

Her voice breaking at times, she testified that her husband had “no choice” but to take the girl. She did not mention how this happened or whether the child was really his, but told the court that they vowed from then on to keep the toddler.

The following day, police officers arrived at their home when they were out. The couple was then called to report at Cantonment Police Complex over the accused’s police report.

They had to leave the toddler with the accused’s relative. The woman testified that a few days later, the authorities found the accused’s allegation to be untrue and referred the case to the Ministry of Social and Family Development.

Staff members at KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital then told the couple that they would take the accused to the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) as she had mental issues. The complainant did not elaborate on this in open court.

She further testified that they immediately hired a lawyer to apply for custody, as well as care and control, of the toddler in the Family Justice Courts.

After the application was granted, the girl continued living with the couple. The adoption was finalised in November 2020.

Before that, the accused had been allowed access to her daughter, such as once a week when she was in IMH. She was also allowed to spend time with her on the weekends at her residence.

POLICE CAME OVER 50 TIMES

The complainant said that when the accused was discharged, she then made multiple allegations against the couple for abusing the girl, and filed “more than 20” court proceedings against them.

After they got care and control of the child in 2013, the complainant said that the accused filed more than 100 police reports against them till 2020. 

Police officers turned up at their residence more than 50 times, but began calling them first in the last two years to see if it was a false alarm.

In one instance, the accused called the police, impersonating the complainant and saying her domestic worker was “poking the child’s eyeballs out of her eyes”. 

“It was a really odd hour, 2.30am… The scariest part is we were sleeping and the police and SCDF (Singapore Civil Defence Force) came to my house… The police came and saw the child was sleeping. Nothing happened,” the complainant testified.

“I felt very upset and really very disappointed. All these allegations are really ridiculous… Each time I want to open the door, the doorbell rings, I get a phone call, I know it’s the police. They became a regular guest at my place.”

The complainant also alleged that the accused would linger around her neighbourhood, once trying to run into the house through a side door, and previously shouted at her while outside a bank branch along Chulia Street. 

“I ignored her and ran for my life,” the complainant added.

As for the social media posts, she said that she first found out about the accused’s Twitter page in 2018. In May 2019, she filed at least three police reports about Twitter and Instagram accounts that the accused had set up.

The accused had posted photos of the adoption papers, including the complainant’s and her family’s full names, residential address and identification details. The accounts were later taken down when she reported them.

However, the accused then set up other accounts, some of which are still around. She also sent Facebook friend requests to the complainant and her two adult children.

Court documents showed that the accused was convicted of stalking in September 2019.

The complainant also testified that the accused would post on social media a few times daily, sometimes stopping for a few days before starting again. The complainant later filed another police report in January last year.

The trial continues on Wednesday afternoon. If convicted, the accused could be jailed for up to two years or fined up to S$10,000, or both, as a repeat offender.