PP v Juminem: Diminished Responsibility & Provocation in Maid's Murder Case

In Public Prosecutor v Juminem and Siti Aminah, the High Court of Singapore, presided over by Justice Choo Han Teck on September 5, 2005, addressed the charge of murder against two Indonesian domestic maids. The accused were charged with the death of their employer. Both accused relied on the defence of diminished responsibility, and the first accused also relied on the defence of grave and sudden provocation. The court found both accused not guilty of murder but guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Both accused persons found not guilty of murder but guilty of the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Two Indonesian maids were charged with murder. The court considered defenses of diminished responsibility and provocation, ultimately convicting them of culpable homicide.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Public ProsecutorProsecutionGovernment AgencyPartialPartial
Jason Chan of Deputy Public Prosecutors
David Khoo of Deputy Public Prosecutors
Amarjit Singh of Deputy Public Prosecutors
JuminemDefendantIndividualPartialPartial
Siti AminahDefendantIndividualPartialPartial

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Choo Han TeckJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Jason ChanDeputy Public Prosecutors
David KhooDeputy Public Prosecutors
Amarjit SinghDeputy Public Prosecutors
Jimmy YimDrew and Napier LLC
Cosmas GomezCosmas and Co
Alvin YeoWong Partnership
Foo Cheow MingKhattar Wong

4. Facts

  1. The victim was strangled to death in her bedroom on March 2, 2004.
  2. The first accused was the victim's maid, and the second accused was the maid of the victim's ex-husband.
  3. Both accused admitted to killing the victim.
  4. The first accused planned to kill the victim due to scolding, feeling insulted, and unpaid debt.
  5. The second accused assisted in the killing.
  6. The accused took money and valuables from the victim's flat after the killing.
  7. The first accused forged the victim's signature on cheques.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Public Prosecutor v Juminem and Another, CC 5/2005, [2005] SGHC 165

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Victim strangled to death
First accused started work with victim
Second accused started work with victim's ex-husband
Accused persons arrested
Dr. Kong's report issued
Dr. Ong examined the second accused
Dr. Kenneth Koh interviewed the first accused
Dr. Kenneth Koh interviewed the first accused
Dr. Ung examined the second accused
Dr. Ung examined the second accused
Dr. Cai examined the second accused
Dr. Cai examined the second accused
Dr. Cai's report issued
Dr. Cai's second report issued
Judgment reserved

7. Legal Issues

  1. Diminished Responsibility
    • Outcome: The court found that both accused suffered from an abnormality of mind that substantially impaired their mental responsibility.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Abnormality of mind
      • Substantial impairment of mental responsibility
      • Depressive disorder
  2. Provocation
    • Outcome: The court found that there was no grave or sudden provocation by the victim.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Grave and sudden provocation
      • Loss of self-control

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Conviction for Murder
  2. Sentencing

9. Cause of Actions

  • Murder
  • Culpable Homicide

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Law
  • Homicide

11. Industries

  • Domestic Services

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Regina v ByrneEnglish Court of AppealYes[1960] 2 QB 396England and WalesCited for the principle that the question of whether the accused was suffering from any abnormality of mind is a question for the jury, and the jury are entitled to take into consideration all the evidence.
Regina v LloydRegina v LloydYes[1967] 1 QB 175England and WalesCited for the definition of 'substantial' in the context of diminished responsibility, clarifying that it does not mean total impairment but something more than trivial or minimal.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Section 300 Exception 7 Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed)Singapore
Section 300 Exception 1 Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed)Singapore
Section 304(a) of the Penal CodeSingapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Diminished responsibility
  • Grave and sudden provocation
  • Abnormality of mind
  • Culpable homicide
  • Depressive disorder
  • Reactive depression
  • Mental responsibility
  • Maid
  • Domestic worker
  • Hysterical psychosis

15.2 Keywords

  • Murder
  • Culpable Homicide
  • Diminished Responsibility
  • Provocation
  • Maid
  • Singapore
  • Criminal Law

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Criminal Law95
Diminished Responsibility90
Mental Capacity Law80
Murder75
Domestic Violence60
Criminal Procedure50
Personal Injury30

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Mental Health Law