ParatuBlog News

NUS Molester Sent to Probation After Judge Labels Actions as Minor Intrusions — Singapore News

Paratu jeemy08 mins
NUS Molester Sent to Probation After Judge Labels Actions as Minor Intrusions — Singapore News

  • Student Faces 21‑Month Probation After “Minor Intrusions” on Metro Train

    *

  • Brought to justice by a train ride, this NUS cousin’s antics ended in a court decision that favoured a less‑severe sentence. The judge shrugged off the prosecution’s plea for jail and handed him supervision instead.*

  • What Went Down

    *

  • The Scene
  • Late night, September 12 on the North East Line heading to Punggol.
  • Young man (Terence Siow, 23) spots a woman in shorts, decides she’s a “perfect target.”
  • Opens the door of adrenaline‑driven, unfiltered curiosity…
  • The Mischief
  • First touch: left hand on her thigh she shuffles back, legs crossed.
  • Second try: he wins a seat switch but the woman dashes to Serangoon.
  • Not deterred, he stalks her on the escalator and sneaks a besotted butt‑touch (over shorts).
  • The Backlash
  • She yells, “Stop it!” and points at him as he scurries away to control.
  • She tells a station officer, convinces them he’s molested her.
  • Almost an hour later, she reports it to the police.

  • Legal Drag‑And‑Drop

    *

  • The Court’s Bottom Line
  • Judge Jasvender Kaur dubbed Siow’s actions “minor intrusions” multiple times.
  • “Potential to excel in life” showed pretty strong academic vibes, so probation jumps in.
  • Outcome: 21 months supervised, no jail yet.
  • The Prosecution’s Rejection
  • The Deputy Public Prosecutor, Benedict Chan, blocked the stay‑at‑home approach.
  • He wants a six‑week jail stint, citing Siow’s repeated, “deep‑seated habit” from his NUS years (since 2016).
  • He slammed the student for not remembering how many times he’d behaved this way.

  • Catch‑22: Campus Discipline vs. Law

    *

  • The university’s Board of Discipline had already step‑up‑action, but Siow only sought help after the court.
  • New Paper’s short, “he’s straight up was arrested in Hougang Avenue” patch the timeline.
  • In the end, the court slid the guilty man over to probation, making him answer to a probation officer and his own conscience instead of a six‑week tenure behind bars.

  • Takeaway

    *

    • When the law bumps up against a “who’s‑right‑to‑make‑a‑mistake” narrative, it can often end in a compromise: keep the offender in the system but give them a chance to clean up and learn before jail kicks in.
    In Siow’s case, the system decided schooling and supervision were more productive than a collar‑jail.

  • And so the train ride that started as a questionable shortcut became a courtroom drama—one that tells you: don’t cross that little girl’s line, or you might end up on a 21‑month supervised probation list.

    • NORMAL

    Legal Drama: Siow’s Minor Infractions Lead to Probation in Singapore

    Quick Facts

    • Three alleged incidents of outrage of modesty.
    • Two of the acts involved brief, skin‑to‑skin contact.
    • Judge Kaur handed down a supervised probation sentence plus 150 hours of community service.
    • Parents bonded for $5,000 to ensure good behaviour.

    Chief Prosecutor’s View

    DPP Chan argued that Siow was “normal in every sense” and that none of the acts showed a serious disorder. The defence, led by Raphael Louis, emphasised that the young man is just finishing up his degree at NUS and is actively seeking help to manage his urges.

    Judge Kaur’s Take

    Judge Kaur described the allegations as minor in nature, noting that the physical touches were “just a brief touch on the thigh.” She highlighted Siow’s age—22 at the time of the incidents—and his strong propensity for reform, citing his solid academic record.

    What the Court Decided
    • Supervised Probation for a specified period.
    • 150 hours of community service.
    • Parents bonded for $5,000 to maintain good behaviour.
    • Judge Kaur’s confidence: “I have every confidence you will not re‑offend and hope you don’t disappoint me.”
    Prosecution’s Next Move

    DPP Chan requested a 14‑day stay of execution to reevaluate the sentence—but Judge Kaur denied the request. “If the prosecution wishes to appeal, it may go ahead,” she told the court.

    Victim’s Reaction

    The victim, who kept her identity anonymous, said she was “disappointed but not surprised” by the outcome, indicating the victim may see the judge’s decision as a realistic outcome given the nature of the infractions.

    Potential Penalties (Large‑Scale Outlook)

    Had the judge chosen a harsher route, each count of outrage of modesty could have led to:

    • Up to two years of jail.
    • Fines.
    • Caning.

    Siow will keep working with the support services at NUS to manage his urges and is expected to return to school shortly after his sentence is complete.

    Note: This article was originally published by The New Paper. Permission is required for reproduction.

    Related News