Aam Usup v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against Conviction for Theft as Domestic Worker
Aam Usup appealed to the High Court of Singapore against her conviction by the District Judge for theft of her employer's safe deposit boxes while working as a domestic worker. The High Court, presided over by Justice Choo Han Teck, dismissed the appeal on October 6, 2009, finding sufficient evidence to incriminate Usup, including corroborated statements from an accomplice and Usup's decision to remain silent during the trial.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Aam Usup appeals against her conviction for theft of her employer's property. The High Court dismissed the appeal, finding sufficient evidence to incriminate her.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Judgment for Respondent | Won | |
| Aam Usup | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Choo Han Teck | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Edwin San | Deputy Public Prosecutors |
| David Low | Deputy Public Prosecutors |
| Anand Nalachandran | ATMD Bird & Bird LLP |
| Sue-Ann Li | ATMD Bird & Bird LLP |
4. Facts
- Aam Usup was charged with theft of her employer's safe deposit boxes.
- Sri Sunarti, another maid, initially confessed and implicated Aam Usup.
- Sri Sunarti later recanted her confession during Aam Usup's trial.
- The prosecution cross-examined Sri Sunarti as a hostile witness.
- Aam Usup elected to remain silent during the trial.
- The District Judge found Sri Sunarti's initial statements to be corroborated by other evidence.
- The High Court found no perversity in the District Judge's findings.
5. Formal Citations
- Aam Usup v Public Prosecutor, DAC 669/2008, MA 74/2009, [2009] SGHC 227
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Sri Sunarti called as a witness for the prosecution | |
| Appeal dismissed | |
| Appellant ordered to commence sentence |
7. Legal Issues
- Admissibility of Accomplice Statements
- Outcome: The court held that the police statements of an accomplice were admissible to impeach her oral testimony and as substantive evidence.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [1996] 1 SLR 143
- Theft by Servant
- Outcome: The court upheld the conviction for theft under s 381 of the Penal Code.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against conviction
- Appeal against sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Theft
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Appeals
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PP v Sng Siew Ngoh | High Court | Yes | [1996] 1 SLR 143 | Singapore | Cited to support the principle that once a statement is admissible to impugn a witness’ credibility under s 157 of the Evidence Act, it is also admissible as substantive evidence under s 147(3). |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code (Cap. 224, 1985 Rev Ed) s 381 | Singapore |
| Evidence Act (Cap. 97, 1997 Rev Ed) s 135 | Singapore |
| Evidence Act (Cap. 97, 1997 Rev Ed) s 156 | Singapore |
| Evidence Act (Cap. 97, 1997 Rev Ed) s 157 | Singapore |
| Evidence Act (Cap. 97, 1997 Rev Ed) s 147(3) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Theft
- Accomplice
- Confession
- Hostile witness
- Corroboration
- Adverse inference
- Safe deposit boxes
- Domestic worker
15.2 Keywords
- Theft
- Criminal Law
- Singapore
- High Court
- Appeal
- Evidence
- Accomplice
- Domestic worker
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Criminal Law | 90 |
| Theft | 85 |
| Evidence Law | 70 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Evidence