Follow us on Telegram for the latest updates: https://t.me/mothershipsg

The Court of Appeal dismissed Beef Bro co-founder Norvan Tan En Jie's appeal against his conviction and sentence for sexually assaulting his sister's drunk friend in 2016.

He was convicted and sentenced to nine years, nine months and four weeks of jail, along with eight strokes of the cane, after claiming trial to two counts of sexual assault by penetration and two counts of outrage of modesty.

The appeal was heard by Court of Appeal Justices Judith Prakash, Tay Yong Kwang and Steven Chong.

Delivering the decision on behalf of the judges on Apr. 5, Prakash highlighted that Tan "took advantage of a woman he knew was drunk and weak", which was "predatory and opportunistic".

Victim is sister's primary school friend

The incident happened on Dec. 25, 2016, when Tan was 21 years old, and the victim, who cannot be named due to a gag order, was 19.

The victim was a primary school friend of Tan's sister, and the pair went out for a night of drinking before returning to Tan's home at 5:40am.

Sexually assaulted victim when she was drunk

During the trial, the victim testified that she was sexually assaulted on the living room sofa, in Tan's sister's room and the toilet that night while she was drunk.

Tan denied the allegations even though his semen was found on the victim's T-shirt.

His sister also testified in court and said she had lied in her police statement and to the victim when texting her about Tan's partial admission.

High Court Judge Ang Cheng Hock presiding the trial, found the victim's testimony convincing, rejected Tan's sister's testimony for not being credible, found Tan's account inconsistent, and convicted him accordingly.

Three issues central to the appeal

Prakash said that the central issue in the appeal is whether the victim was assaulted. Because if she was, the assailant could only be Tan, as he was the only male in the flat who was not asleep or talking to his sister.

Hence, she said the issue that must be determined is whether the victim is credible, whether Tan's sister's testimony is accepted, and whether semen found on the victim's T-shirt was as probative as the trial judge found.

Victim was "credible and truthful"

Prakash said that they found the victim was a "credible and truthful witness" who was consistent in the main features of her account and resisted embellishing it.

For example, she admitted that she did not see her assailant's face and thought it was the appellant because of his voice and his build.

Prakash also stated that the victim's account was consistent with the injuries she suffered, and those injuries were not consistent with any alternative theory, such as the defence's theory that the victim made up the assault.

Prakash explained,

"The fact that the first assertion of assault was made as soon as she awoke tends to support the veracity of her account, as she was weak and intoxicated during the night and not in any condition to make up malicious stories of sexual assault."

Tan's sister was not truthful in court

On whether Tan's sister was credible, Prakash said they agreed with the trial judge's decision to impeach her testimony based on the "palpable discomfort" she displayed when testifying in court.

Prakash pointed out that her statements to the police, on the other hand, had the ring of truth and were consistent with the circumstances.

Semen on T-shirt important evidence

Prakash said they also expressed to the defence counsel that semen on the T-shirt was important corroboration and striking that the victim didn't know about it when she made her allegations.

"The appellant's explanations for how else the semen could have got onto the T-shirt are contrived and fanciful," she added. "The various messages from the Complainant to her friends and boyfriend and their testimony in court of her state and accounts immediately after the incident provide corroboration too."

Understandable that victim couldn't explain some things

Finally, even though the defence argued that there were things the victim couldn't explain, such as how she got dressed again and exactly how she was assaulted, the judges felt that the arguments were without substance.

Prakash explained,

"Bearing in mind that she was weak from repeated vomiting and still influenced by her intoxication, those matters are understandable. It is also safe, we think, to infer that although the Complainant was conscious of the assault, she was not in a state to object or struggle or complain."

She added that Tan kept changing his account, in contrast to the victim's consistent testimony.

After dismissing the appeal for his conviction, the judges similarly upheld the original sentence as they did not think it was excessive considering his behaviour during the crimes.

Begged the judges to review his case "one more time"

After the judges' decision, Tan "begged" them to "review the case one more time", according to CNA.

Tan claimed, "Even if I were to do something like this, I wouldn't do this in my own house."

Prakash reiterated that the court had reviewed the case and was satisfied with its decision.

The court granted Tan's request to defer his sentence by a week.

He will begin his sentence on Apr. 12, 2023.

Related stories

Top photos via Norvan Tan's FB and Google Maps