Wong Tian Jun De Beers v Public Prosecutor: Cheating for Sex & Criminal Intimidation Sentencing
Wong Tian Jun De Beers appealed against his sentence of 42 months' imprisonment and a S$20,000 fine for ten charges, including cheating under s 417 of the Penal Code, criminal intimidation under s 506 of the Penal Code, and an offence under s 29(1)(a) of the Films Act. The Chief Justice dismissed the appeal and enhanced the sentence to eight years and five months' imprisonment and a S$20,000 fine, finding the original sentence inadequate given the severity and prolonged nature of the offenses, which involved deceiving women into sexual acts.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal dismissed and sentence enhanced.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Wong Tian Jun De Beers appeals his sentence for cheating and criminal intimidation related to procuring sex. The appeal was dismissed and the sentence enhanced.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wong Tian Jun De Beers | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed, Sentence Enhanced | Lost | Isaac Riko Chua, Genesa Tan |
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal Dismissed, Sentence Enhanced | Won | Cheng Yuxi, Tan Pei Wei |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Isaac Riko Chua | Tembusu Law LLC |
| Genesa Tan | Tembusu Law LLC |
| Cheng Yuxi | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Tan Pei Wei | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
4. Facts
- The Appellant pleaded guilty to ten charges, including cheating, criminal intimidation, and offenses under the Films Act.
- The Appellant devised a scheme to falsely represent himself as an agent for "sugar daddies" to procure sex.
- The Appellant claimed he needed nude images and sexual acts to assess women for wealthy clients, who did not exist.
- The Appellant's scheme ensnared at least 11 female victims aged between 18 and 24 years.
- The Appellant created falsified chat conversations to convince victims of the veracity of his narrative.
- The Appellant showed victims photos and videos of nude women to highlight the victims would be at a disadvantage.
- The Appellant exploited nude photos and videos of the victims to deter them from reporting to the police.
5. Formal Citations
- Wong Tian Jun De Beers v Public Prosecutor, Magistrate’s Appeal No 9101 of 2021, [2021] SGHC 273
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Offenses began. | |
| Appellant was reported to the authorities. | |
| Psychiatric report prepared by Dr. Ken Ung Eng Khean. | |
| District Judge delivered judgment. | |
| Hearing of appeal. | |
| Appellant's further written submissions. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Sentencing for Cheating Offences
- Outcome: The court enhanced the individual sentences for the cheating offences, finding the original sentences inadequate given the severity of the offenses.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Appropriateness of individual sentences
- Running of sentences concurrently or consecutively
- Application of the totality principle
- Related Cases:
- [2018] 5 SLR 799
- [2008] 1 SLR(R) 449
- [2018] 4 SLR 609
- Admissibility and Weight of Psychiatric Evidence
- Outcome: The court found the psychiatric evidence presented by the appellant to be unreliable and gave it no weight.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Reliability of expert reports
- Duty of experts to the court
- Impact of psychiatric condition on sentencing
- Related Cases:
- [2018] 2 SLR 249
- [2021] SGCA 90
- Application of the Totality Principle
- Outcome: The court applied the totality principle to determine an appropriate overall sentence, balancing the seriousness of the offenses with the offender's past record and future prospects.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Proportionality of aggregate sentence
- Crushing effect on offender
- Consideration of past record and future prospects
- Related Cases:
- [2018] 5 SLR 799
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Cheating
- Criminal Intimidation
- Violation of Films Act
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Sentencing Guidelines
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor v Raveen Balakrishnan | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] 5 SLR 799 | Singapore | Cited for the analytical framework for sentencing a multiple offender. |
| Public Prosecutor v Mohammad Al-Ansari bin Basri | High Court | Yes | [2008] 1 SLR(R) 449 | Singapore | Cited regarding the vulnerability of victims who are unlikely to report wrongdoing due to moral stigma. |
| Logachev Vladislav v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2018] 4 SLR 609 | Singapore | Cited for the use of a harm-culpability matrix in sentencing. |
| Public Prosecutor v Chia Kee Chen and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] 2 SLR 249 | Singapore | Cited for principles relating to expert evidence, specifically the duties and expectations of psychiatrists. |
| Miya Manik v Public Prosecutor and another matter | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2021] SGCA 90 | Singapore | Cited for the court's rejection of psychiatric evidence that was sought to be adduced. |
| Anita Damu v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2020] 3 SLR 825 | Singapore | Cited for the emphasis that an expert’s opinion must be scrutinised for factual and logical cogency. |
| Kanagaratnam Nicholas Jens v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2019] 5 SLR 887 | Singapore | Cited for the court severely criticising the psychiatric evidence tendered by parties and also reiterating what the court expects of experts. |
| Mehra Radhika v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2015] 1 SLR 96 | Singapore | Cited for the court finding that the expert medical report tendered was “patently lacking in objectivity”. |
| Ng Kean Meng Terence v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 2 SLR 449 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the punishment imposed must fit both the crime and the offender. |
| Syed Zainuddin Bin Syed Salim v Public Prosecutor | District Court | Yes | [2002] SGDC 293 | Singapore | Cited as a case involving cheating to procure a sexual act in a non-commercial sex setting, but found to be of limited utility due to changes in sentencing laws and lack of consideration for violation of sexual integrity. |
| Gan Chai Bee Anne v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2019] 4 SLR 838 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that premeditation demonstrates a high degree of conscious choice and enlivens the need for a sentence that deters the offender specifically from repeating such conduct. |
| Public Prosecutor v Law Aik Meng | High Court | Yes | [2007] 2 SLR(R) 814 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that premeditation demonstrates a high degree of conscious choice and enlivens the need for a sentence that deters the offender specifically from repeating such conduct. |
| Public Prosecutor v Leong Wai Nam | High Court | Yes | [2010] 2 SLR 284 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a clean record carries hardly any mitigating force when an accused person is convicted of a string of offences committed over a spectrum of time. |
| Public Prosecutor v Yap Weng Wah | High Court | Yes | [2015] 3 SLR 297 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a clean record carries hardly any mitigating force when an accused person is convicted of a string of offences committed over a spectrum of time. |
| Public Prosecutor v BMF | High Court | Yes | [2019] SGHC 227 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a clean record carries hardly any mitigating force when an accused person is convicted of a string of offences committed over a spectrum of time. |
| Chen Weixiong Jerriek v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2003] 2 SLR(R) 334 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that there was little mitigating value in pleading guilty where the proverbial “game was up”. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 417 | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 506 | Singapore |
| Films Act (Cap 107, 1998 Rev Ed) s 29(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 375(1) | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 90 | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 420A | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 377BE(2) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Cheating for sex
- Criminal intimidation
- Sugar daddy
- Sugar babe
- Nude photographs
- Sexual acts
- False representation
- Victim vulnerability
- Sentencing framework
- Totality principle
15.2 Keywords
- cheating
- criminal intimidation
- films act
- sentencing
- sexual offences
- cybercrime
- Singapore
- High Court
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Sentencing
- Sexual Offences
- Cybercrime
17. Areas of Law
- Criminal Procedure and Sentencing
- Sentencing
- Criminal Law
- Cheating
- Criminal Intimidation
- Films Act