'Stiff penalty needed' for maids who attack elderly
Indonesia maid Fitriah was charged with the murder of her employer Madam Sng Gek Wah. Madam Sng was found dead in her Farleigh Avenue home in Serangoon Gardens. She had no visible injuries other than a cut on her forehead.
By K.C. Vijayan, Law Correspondent
The Straits Times
Friday, Nov 16, 2012
SINGAPORE - Singapore's highest court has made it clear that the public interest needs to be protected when dealing with domestic maids who are hired to look after the elderly, but end up killing them.
The Court of Appeal, comprising Judges of Appeal Chao Hick Tin, V.K. Rajah and Justice Philip Pillai, said such public interest issues "cannot be over-emphasised", as it released judgment grounds on Monday on why it doubled the jail term of Indonesian Vitria Wahyuni to 20 years.
Vitria, 19, strangled her 87-year-old employer Sng Gek Wah to death in November 2009. She was sentenced to 10 years in jail by the High Court in March after pleading guilty to culpable homicide.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Lau Wing Yum appealed against the sentence, arguing the jail term was "manifestly inadequate".
He pointed out that the judge had failed to give sufficient weight to the need for general deterrence and protection of the public.
In opposing the appeal, Vitria's lawyer Mohd Muzammil Mohd urged the court to consider her young age at the time she killed Madam Sng, her rural background and relative immaturity.
Vitria was the first maid to be charged with culpable homicide after the law was changed in 2008 to increase the jail term for the offence to up to 20 years, or life. Before that, the jail term was up to 10 years, or life.
The change was aimed at giving judges more flexibility and it is believed the Court of Appeal's judgment, being the first where the changed laws applied, will now serve as a guide for similar cases in the future.
Stressing that the sentencing decision has to be "fact-sensitive", the judges noted that in four previous cases, maids who killed their employers had been jailed for life, as the accused were of violent character or unstable, or their acts were premeditated.
The court also cited two other cases where the convicted maids were jailed for 10 years or less as the killers had lost self-control or were mentally abnormal.
The court found Vitria's case was a planned and "premeditated killing" and not committed "in hot blood". There were also no circumstances to mitigate her crime other than her young age then.
It held that the High Court judge had failed to give sufficient weight to the aggravating circumstances and also sufficient consideration to the need for deterrence in the interest of the public.
"Many families in Singapore engage domestic workers to care for their elderly," said the Court of Appeal.
"(It) is absolutely essential that employers and their family members, as well as the domestic workers themselves, are able... to enjoy peace of mind being served and serving... in the safe confines of a domestic setting for the duration of their relationship," wrote Judge of Appeal Chao.
The court called for a stiff sentence where the act is deliberate, disproportionate and was not immediately provoked violence.
Those who committed offences against a vulnerable and defenceless person ought to be more severely dealt with, said the court.
"A loud and clear message must be sent out that the courts will not tolerate any such domestic violence. Here was an 87-year-old lady who was hard of hearing and prone to speak loudly," said Judge of Appeal Chao.
"Vitria breached the trust and confidence the deceased reposed in her in the most monstrous manner when she cold-bloodedly killed her charge."
[email protected]
