Repeat drink driving lawyer, 56, jailed & fined for crashing into railings & lying to police

A Singaporean lawyer was driving along Bukit Panjang Road after a drinking session when he lost control of the vehicle on Apr. 7, 2024.

Steven Lam, 56, was previously convicted of drink driving in 2006 as well.

In the latest case, Lam also lied to the police and claimed that somebody else was driving the vehicle at the time, according to court documents seen by Mothership.

He eventually pleaded guilty to driving without due care and attention, drink driving, and two counts of giving false information to a public servant.

Lam was sentenced to eight weeks’ jail and fined S$18,000 on Nov. 7.

He was also disqualified from holding or obtaining all classes of driving licences for a period of six years from his release date.

Director of law firm

At the time of the offences, Lam was a practising lawyer of about 30 years.

He was called to the English Bar in 1995 and to the Singapore Bar in 1996.

He is the founder and director of Templars Law LLC.

Drank 4 or 5 cans of beer

On the night of Apr. 6, 2024, Lam was drinking at one of his friends' house from about 8pm or 9pm to midnight.

He admitted that he consumed about four or five cans of beer then.

Sometime after midnight, he decided to drive home, which was a distance of about 19.8km.

After driving about 6.9km, he was driving in the second lane along Bukit Panjang Road in the direction of Choa Chu Kang Road, approaching the intersection with Lompang Road.

Instead of staying in the lane, Lam veered right into the rightmost lane, straddling both lanes at some point.

He eventually lost control of his car, causing it to mount the right curb onto the road divider, colliding into nine sections of the central guard railings and destroying the plants on the road divider.

The cost of repair for the nine sections of the central guard railings provided by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) was S$1,848, the prosecution said.

Tried to leave the scene but was stopped by witnesses

Several passers-by witnessed the collision and approached Lam's car to check on the situation and ensure his well-being.

However,Lam remained in his car for a while before exiting the car and crossing to the other side of the road.

He then stood by the roadside using his phone for some time, before walking towards the nearby bus stop.

He later returned and attempted to move his car out of the road divider to no avail.

Lam returned to the bus stop and was trying to flag a taxi when a witness approached to stop.

The witness had to physically restrain Lam to ensure he could not leave the scene. The two even got into a physical tussle because of this.

Together with three other witnesses, Lam was preventing from leaving before the police arrived.

Lam, who reeked of alcohol at the time, repeatedly tried to convince them to leave him alone and let him go.

However, they refused and asked him to explain himself to the police.

Lied that he was not the driver

Police officers later arrived at about 12:49am and noticed that Lam reeked of alcohol, his face was flushed, his eyes were bloodshot, and his gait was unsteady.

Lam admitted that he was intoxicated as he had drunk five cans of beer that night.

A breathalyser test on Lam showed a “FAIL” result.

However, Lam denied that he was the driver of his car to the officers and claimed to be asleep at the backseat of the car.

He further claimed that the unknown friend driving his car had gotten into an accident, which woke him up.

He alleged that he saw the unknown friend run away from the driver’s seat so he had merely went up to switch off the engine and thus, got out of the driver’s seat.

When probed about his friend, he refused to provide any details of the unknown friend, claiming that he did not know his name or number.

Traffic police resources were directed to search the vicinity of Lompang Road for this alleged unknown friend who Lam claimed to be the driver.

Lam's information was later refuted by the eyewitnesses at the scene who identified him as the driver.

Lied again after arrest

Lam was then placed under arrest for driving under the influence of alcohol and brought to the traffic police headquarters.

There, he was subjected to the Breath Analyzing Device (BAD) test which revealed that the proportion of alcohol in the his breath was 61mcg of alcohol in every 100ml of breath.

This exceeded the prescribed limit of 35mcg of alcohol per 100ml of breath.

During his statement at the traffic police headquarters, Lam lied again.

He told the police officer that he was drinking at a friend house the previous night and his friend had arranged for someone to send him back.

However, he could not provide a name or even the gender of the individual who allegedly drove him.

He could not confirm whether the alleged driver was part of the group that he was drinking with.

He also claimed that he was sitting at the passenger seat in front and had fallen asleep, only waking up after the accident.

He even offered to “check further” on who the driver might be.

Saying he was a practising lawyer, he told the police that he was aware that providing a false statement was an offence.

Acting on his information, the traffic police expended unnecessary resources and man hours to interview various witnesses, including his friend and other eyewitnesses, to ascertain the identity of the driver, the prosecution said.

Top photos from Templars Law LLC website and Shin Min Daily News