28-year-old Brandon Wan Yeu Herng was sentenced to 5 weeks imprisonment on Wednesday after pleading guilty to one charge of tasking two upskirt videos of a woman without her consent. with two other charges being considered during his sentencing.

The victim cannot be revealed due to a court order protecting her identity.

What happened?

According to Deputy Public Prosecutor Tung Shou Pin, the incident occurred on the morning of July 29 last year. Upon disembarking from a bus at a stop near Clementi MRT Station, Wan noticed the victim heading in the same direction. Succumbing to the temptation to film her, Wan decided to record an upskirt video.

Wan positioned the back of his mobile phone against a book he was carrying, with the phone camera facing upward. He then stood behind the woman as they rode the escalator, moving his phone closer to capture an upskirt video beneath her dress.

Continuing to follow closely, Wan accompanied the woman as they entered the MRT station’s concourse and passed through the gantries. On the subsequent escalator, Wan once again stood directly behind her and filmed a second upskirt video.

A witness named Mr. Wesley Sim observed Wan secretly filming the victim on both occasions and chose to tail them. While on the MRT platform, Mr. Sim intervened, informing the woman that Wan had been recording upskirt videos of her. Startled, Wan offered to delete the videos, but Mr. Sim demanded that he surrender his mobile phone.

Mr. Sim then showed the victim the evidence of Wan’s actions. Subsequently, both Mr. Sim and the woman approached officers from the Public Transport Security Command, who apprehended Wan.

Upskirt news “piqued his interest”

The court learned that Wan had been consuming voyeuristic content through Telegram group channels since 2021. Following his arrest, snapshots from the voyeuristic videos, along with two additional upskirt videos captured on July 13 at Bayfront MRT Station and on July 27 at Clementi MRT Station, were discovered on his phone. These two videos were considered during the sentencing.

Court documents state that Wan admitted to reading news reports on voyeurism offenses before committing the acts. The news reports had piqued his interest and ultimately led him to engage in similar offenses.

The prosecution sought a jail term of five to six weeks for Wan. Conversely, Mr. Ashvin Hariharan, Wan’s defense lawyer from Kalidass Law Corporation, urged District Judge Lim Wee Ming to consider a lighter sentence of one week in jail.

Mr. Hariharan argued that Wan’s actions were impulsive and lacked premeditation, as he decided to commit the offense only upon seeing the victim at the bus stop while coincidentally heading in the same direction. He also pointed out that Wan’s offer to delete the videos demonstrated his remorse and emphasized that Wan had sought counseling, reducing the likelihood of reoffending.

In response, Deputy Public Prosecutor Tung countered that Wan’s actions were not impulsive since he had the opportunity to reconsider after capturing the first video. Tung also highlighted that Wan sought counseling only after being caught in the act.

The offense of capturing upskirt videos without consent carries a penalty of up to two years’ imprisonment, a fine, caning, or any combination thereof.

FIVE MEN TO BE CHARGED WITH OUTRAGE OF MODESTY

The Police will be charging five men, aged between 37 and 60, in court on 31 May 2023 for their suspected involvement in five separate cases of outrage of modesty.

The cases are as follows:

1. Sometime in 2019, a then 56-year-old man had allegedly molested his stepdaughter, a then 16-year-old girl, at his house along Marsiling Drive. The man will be charged in court with one count of outrage of modesty under Section 354(1) of the Penal Code. He will also be charged with one count of uttering word or gestures intended to insult modesty of any person under Section 377BA of the Penal Code.
2. On 15 September 2021, a then 57-year-old man had allegedly molested a then 25-year-old woman at his workplace along South Bridge Road. The man will be charged with two counts of outrage of modesty under Section 354(1) of the Penal Code.
3. On 9 January 2023, a 37-year-old driver had allegedly molested a 33-year-old woman after she had alighted from his vehicle along Robinson Road. The man will be charged with one count of outrage of modesty under Section 354(1) of the Penal Code 1871.
4. On 10 February 2023, a 45-year-old man had allegedly molested an 18-year-old woman in the vicinity of Golden Mile Complex. The man will be charged in court with one count of outrage of modesty under Section 354(1) of the Penal Code 1871.
5. On 2 April 2023, a 42-year-old man had allegedly molested his co-worker, a 26-year-old woman at his workplace located along Robinson Road. The man will be charged with three counts of outrage of modesty under Section 354(1) of the Penal Code 1871.

The offence of outrage of modesty-under Section 354(1) of the Penal Code 1871 carries an imprisonment term which may extend to three years, a fine, caning, or any combination of such punishments. The offence of uttering words or gestures intended to insult modesty of any person under Section 377BA of the Penal Code 1871 carries an imprisonment term which may extend to one year, a fine, or any combination of such punishments.

The Police have zero tolerance towards offenders who threaten the personal safety of the community, and offenders will be dealt with sternly in accordance with the law. The Police would also like to urge members of the public to remain vigilant, and if they witness an incident of outrage of modesty, or are aware of someone being a victim of outrage of modesty, to report the matter to the Police immediately.

PUBLIC AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT
SINGAPORE POLICE FORCE
30 May 2023 @ 8:45 PM

MAN TO BE CHARGED WITH OFFENCES RELATED TO FRAUDULENT INSURANCE CLAIMS

A 45-year-old former employee of an insurance company will be charged in court on 1 June 2023 with the offences of cheating, forgery, falsification of account and money laundering. The charges include false insurance claims allegedly processed or initiated by the accused while he was under employment with the insurer.

Between July 2010 and August 2016, the man allegedly created fraudulent emails on 58 occasions to cheat his employer into effecting payments of more than $1.6m to third-party bank accounts. He was further alleged to have deceived his employer into processing 297 false claim payments of more than $8.9m to third-party bank accounts from May 2010 to September 2017. Investigations showed that about $55,600 were allegedly laundered from the third-party bank accounts to the man’s personal bank accounts.

To conceal the false claim payments, the man allegedly falsified the electronic records on the company’s claims processing system by reversing or instructing others to reverse the false claim payments which the company has paid out.

The following are the punishments for the respective offences:

Cheating under Section 420 of the Penal Code-punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 10 years and a fine;

Forgery for the purpose of cheating under Section 468 of the Penal Code, imprisonment for a term which may extend to 10 years and a fine;

Falsification of accounts under Section 477A of the Penal Code, imprisonment for a term which may extend to 10 years, a fine, or both; and

Money laundering under Section 47(1)(c) of the Corruption, Drug Trafficking, and other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act, imprisonment for a term which may extend to 10 years, a fine, or both.

PUBLIC AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT
SINGAPORE POLICE FORCE
31 May 2023 @ 4:05 PM

MAN ARRESTED FOR A SERIES OF RENTAL SCAMS

The Police have arrested a 32-year-old man for his suspected involvement in a series of rental scams via a Telegram group chat.

Between March and May 2023, the Police received several reports lodged by victims on home rental scams. The man had contacted the victims who expressed their interest to rent either bedrooms or the whole housing unit in a Telegram group chat, on the pretext of renting out rooms at a housing unit along Yishun Avenue 11. After receiving payments for the deposits of more than $7,500 via bank transfers, the man allegedly cancelled the agreements and did not rent the promised rooms or unit out.

Through follow-up investigations, officers from Woodlands Police Division established the identity of the man and arrested him on 30 May 2023.

The man will be charged in court on 31 May 2023 with the offence of cheating under Section 420 of the Penal Code 1871. The offence carries an imprisonment term of up to ten years and a fine.

The Police would like to remind members of the public to be wary of such scams and to adopt the following precautionary measures to avoid falling prey to rental scams:

Do not make any advance payment until the tenancy is confirmed, and pay the rental deposit and rents by cheque or via bank transfer for documentary proof;

Visit the housing unit which you intend to rent to confirm its existence, the unit’s condition and potential signs of multiple subletting; and

Verify the identities of the person/s whom you are dealing with and their relationship to the housing unit, especially when you are not engaging the services of a licensed estate agent or registered salespersons.
For more information on scams, members of the public can visit scamalert.sg or call the Anti-Scam Hotline at 1800-722-6688. Anyone with information on such scams may call the Police hotline at 1800-255 0000 or submit information online at www.police.gov.sg/iwitness.

PUBLIC AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT
SINGAPORE POLICE FORCE
30 May 2023 @ 9:00 PM

A disgruntled customer recently voiced their dissatisfaction with a Tada driver, raising concerns about the driver’s attitude and the subsequent customer service provided by Tada Singapore. The complaint sheds light on the challenges faced during the booking process and the unpleasant experience that followed.

The customer had booked an Economy Large car, clearly indicating in the remarks that it was for five passengers. However, upon arrival at the pick-up location, the driver displayed a negative attitude towards the group, leaving the impression that he held a racial bias against the man’s companions.

Drives 6-seater but cannot pick up 5 pax

Seeking assistance on how to set up the back seat to accommodate the stated number of passengers, the customer received an unhelpful response from the driver. While attempting to figure it out themselves, the driver made a comment questioning the number of passengers.

The customer clarified that they were five individuals, as stated in the booking app. To their surprise, the driver responded that his car could only accommodate four passengers, despite the obvious fact that it was a 6-seater vehicle.

Frustrated with the driver’s attitude and unwillingness to provide the service they had booked, the customer asked if he wants to drive them or not. The driver simply refused, instructing them to get out of his car. The customers complied, and the driver drove off without canceling the booking. Left without transportation, the customer had to use their spouse’s phone to book another car.

The situation took an unexpected turn when, in the middle of the night, the customer received a payment notification from Tada requesting payment for the canceled ride.

Driver jialat, customer service lagi worse

Confused and dissatisfied, the customer contacted Tada customer service the following morning. The first representative, identified as Sarah, appeared dismissive and hurried to end the call.

The customer explained the entire situation, highlighting the payment mode discrepancy, but Sarah insisted that it was booked as a cash payment, contrary to the customer’s payment preference of QR code.

Frustrated with the first call, the customer made a second attempt to speak with Sarah to avoid having to repeat their concerns. However, the call was abruptly disconnected by a representative named Johnathan, leaving the customer feeling disrespected and unheard.

In their third call to Tada customer service, the customer spoke with Michael, who offered a similar response. Michael acknowledged that transferring calls was not possible and defended Sarah’s handling of the previous conversation.

He explained that the company’s standard operating procedure was to escalate complaints to higher authorities for investigation, and customers could expect a response via email within three working days. When asked why email communication was preferred over a phone call, Michael attributed it to the company’s SOP.

The complaint highlights concerns about the quality of service provided by Tada Singapore, leaving the customer disappointed and questioning the company’s commitment to customer satisfaction.