High Court Justice Vincent Hoong has made it clear that questions implying that a victim’s attire invites sexual assault will not be tolerated in court.
Justice Hoong’s remarks came as he dismissed an appeal from a tutor sentenced to 16 months’ jail for molesting a 10-year-old pupil at his tuition centre.
The judge’s warning followed a problematic line of questioning by the tutor’s lawyer, Jeffrey Beh, regarding the victim’s clothing.
According to The Strait Times (ST), the assault occurred on 12 Dec 2018, when the victim was alone with the tutor during an English lesson.
The tutor was found to have touched the victim’s breasts over her clothes, as well as her thigh and crotch area, and kissed the back of her neck.
The victim reported the incident to her father, who then lodged a police report.
However, the tutor denied the charges, claiming he only patted the victim on the shoulder to offer encouragement.
A district judge convicted him and sentenced him to 14 months in jail, with an additional two months in lieu of caning due to his age.
Justice Hoong upheld the conviction earlier this year and issued detailed written reasons for his decision on Thursday (29 Aug).
In his statement, Justice Hoong also addressed the conduct of the tutor’s lawyer during the cross-examination of the victim.
The victim, who was 14 years old at the time of her testimony, stated that during the assault, she was wearing a black top under a pink dress.
She described that the tutor had touched her breast over the black top but beneath the pink dress.
During cross-examination, the tutor’s lawyer questioned the victim’s account, highlighting an inconsistency because she had not mentioned the black top in her initial police statement.
The lawyer argued that it was important to know the specifics of the clothing involved in molestation cases.
Justice Hoong described this questioning as a “broad, unnuanced statement” and cautioned that while questions about clothing can be relevant, they must be carefully framed to avoid implying that the victim’s attire invited the assault.
Additionally, Justice Hoong addressed objections to the implementation of shielding measures during the trial.
These measures, which allow victims under 18 to testify without seeing the accused, were contested by the defence, who argued that such measures implied a threat had been made to the victim.
Justice Hoong clarified that shielding measures are designed to minimise the risk of re-traumatisation for victims by preventing them from having to share the same physical space as their accused during their testimony.
He emphasised that these measures are intended to protect vulnerable witnesses and do not undermine the presumption of innocence.
Have news you must share? Get in touch with us via email at news@mustsharenews.com.
Featured image by MS News.
She qualified for the final after topping her heat.
The surface could have been weakened by hot weather coupled with bouts of thunderstorms, eyewitnesses…
The accident caused a portion of the road to be closed.
They depicted the KL skyline featuring the iconic Petronas Twin Towers and other landmarks.
This came 9 days after the unfortunate incident.
One netizen even had suspicions that the clip was sped up.