Man, 28, who paid underage girls for sex gets 25½ years’ jail, caning for rape

AI generated

SINGAPORE – A 28-year-old man who raped three underage girls after offering to pay them for sex was sentenced to 25½ years’ jail and 24 strokes of the cane on July 27.

Edmund Tan Shi Hui had met the three girls online and engaged in multiple penetrative sexual acts with them on eight separate occasions over more than a year.

He offered the girls, who were then 13 years old, up to $500 each time.

In sentencing, Justice Andre Maniam rejected arguments by Tan’s lawyer that offences committed in the context of commercial sex with minors made him less blameworthy.

On the contrary, said the judge, commercial sex with a minor is an aggravating factor in an offence of statutory rape.

Tan had pleaded guilty to six charges of statutory rape committed between March 2022 and July 2023.

Another 10 charges – four of statutory rape, three of sexual assault by penetration, and three of sexual penetration of a minor below the age of 16 – were considered in sentencing.

At the time of the offences, Tan was between 24 and 25 years old, and worked as a waiter.

The first victim had posted an advertisement in a Telegram chat group stating that she was 16 to 18 years old and was offering her services in exchange for $200 to $300.

After he sent her a private message, she agreed to accept $100.

On March 4, 2022, after school, he had sex with the girl at a handicap toilet in Kovan MRT Station.

He then told her that he knew she was younger than her declared age and that he would not report her as he would get into worse trouble than she would.

After the incident, he texted her to say that he regretted giving her so much money and asked for a video call with her.

She agreed after Tan promised that he would not record the video and would pay her $500.

In a school toilet, the girl took the video call. But Tan blocked her after the call.

She later chanced upon him on an online video-conferencing platform and met him again for paid sex on Dec 26, 2022, and April 18, 2023.

Tan met the second victim via the same video-conferencing platform.

On Sept 8, 2022, he met her at his flat after she agreed to $400.

On Sept 18, 2022, Tan paid her $500 after they had sex at a handicap toilet in Punggol. After this incident, she lied to him that she was 14 years old.

On Dec 15, 2022, they met again at his flat.

Tan got to know the third victim on July 7, 2023, on the same platform.

They moved the conversation to Telegram, and she agreed to have paid sex with him on the same day.

Later that day, she sent him her nude pictures after he asked for them. When he asked her what she was busy with, she replied that she was 13 years old and still had school.

That night, they engaged in sex acts at the staircase landing of a block of flats after he paid her $500.

They were interrupted by a passer-by but continued at another staircase landing.

The next day, he texted her to ask for sex again, but she said she was not free.

On July 30, 2023, she texted him, stating that she had spoken to the police.

He was arrested on Aug 4, 2023, for sexual offences committed against the third victim, and his mobile phone was seized.

Investigations revealed that he kept a detailed diary of his expenditure on sexual acts with 17 girls, out of which the three victims were under 14.

Deputy Public Prosecutor Jordon Li sought a jail term of 23½ to 27½ years and 24 strokes of the cane.

He said Tan’s offences demonstrated predatory behaviour and the exploitation of the victims.

Defence counsel William da Silva argued that the jail term sought by the prosecution was “crushing”, as Tan will be in prison for almost as long as he had been alive.

He contended that 14 years’ jail and 12 strokes of the cane were sufficient to deter Tan and others.

The lawyer noted that the maximum jail term for commercial sex with a minor under 18 years old was seven years, compared with a maximum of 20 years for rape.

He argued that this indicated that paying for sex was deemed to be less serious.

But the judge said Parliament had intended to protect minors by making paid sex with those under 18 an offence, even though non-commercial sex with minors in that age bracket is not otherwise an offence.