Father accused of raping daughter: Trial court hears closing arguments

SINGAPORE: The prosecution and defence in a case of a man accused of raping his daughter after years of sexual abuse made their closing arguments on Monday (Feb 5), with the prosecution painting him as an evasive and combative witness and the defence poking holes in the alleged victim's testimony.

The prosecution urged the judge to convict the 37-year-old man of all 13 charges against his biological daughter, including sexual assault, aggravated rape and showing pornography to his daughter.

A team of prosecutors led by Deputy Public Prosecutor David Khoo argued that the man's daughter was an unusually convincing witness who could provide detailed and textured accounts of the many incidents against her, while pointing the finger at the accused for "assassinating" his own daughter's character.

Defence lawyers Ramesh Tiwary and Cory Wong urged the court to acquit their client of all charges instead, saying the prosecution had not proven its case and pointing out discrepancies in the alleged victim's accounts, claiming that she was lying in all her allegations.

The prosecution's case is that the man "systematically groomed" his daughter from when she was in kindergarten, beginning with the procurement of an indecent act in the toilet and culminating in rape in August 2019 when the girl was 12.

The girl was exposed to porn from a tender age and engaged in self-harm, the prosecution alleged. Among the witnesses called for the prosecution's case were the girl herself, her friends whom she had told about the sex acts, and her teacher who saw cuts on her wrist.

The defence's case was described as "all or nothing" - meaning he denied every single accusation of sexual abuse. The lawyers put forth a case alleging that the daughter was lying, with the accused testifying about how she purportedly began lying from a young age.

In particular, the lawyers produced text messages surrounding an alleged incident of sexual assault during cookie baking to show that their client had been busy with work and did not have time to bake with his daughter as promised that night.

Another incident where much ink was spilled involved a sex toy. The accused claimed that he had found it near his daughter's pillow.

He had purchased the toy about a month earlier in August 2019 - with receipts shown to the court - and claimed it was to surprise his wife, for their anniversary.

However, the prosecution pressed him on why he did not tell his wife about it at all even after the anniversary came and went, and did not use it on his wife.

Instead, the prosecution charged that he had used it on his daughter and had always intended to use it on her.

PROSECUTION'S ARGUMENTS

On Monday, Deputy Public Prosecutor David Khoo urged the judge to recall how the alleged victim had tried her very best to give evidence, despite her young age of 15 at the time and the many incidents she had to recall.

"When your honour evaluates her evidence, I urge your honour to look at her evidence through the lens of a child victim who has gone through this ... traumatic experience," said Mr Khoo.

He said it would be expected that her evidence would have discrepancies depending on how the questions were asked and when they were asked. At times, she could have forgotten some details, said Mr Khoo.

Justice Valerie Thean said the sex toy was an important part of the evidence. However, the girl had told a doctor that a sex toy was used on her five times in June 2019 and said similar things to her friends.

However, the investigating officer testified that the sex toys in question were only purchased on Aug 20, 2019.

"That's quite material, right," said the judge.

Mr Khoo explained that the girl had not mentioned a sex toy to her friends, instead referring to sex acts. In early September 2019, she told one of her friends that she had "lost her virginity", said Mr Khoo.

He said it "must have been a mistake" for the girl to tell the doctor that the sex toy was used on her in June, highlighting that the point of the doctor's interview was to examine her for signs of abuse and not to get a complete account of the sexual abuse.

Mr Khoo and his colleagues, prosecutors Mr Tay Jia En and Ms Kelly Ng, argued in their written submissions that the alleged victim's account contained a "ring of truth".

In contrast, the accused was evasive and combative, choosing to "feign ignorance" on some matters while going into detail in other matters.

For example, when the prosecution questioned him about his opinion upon finding a sex toy on his daughter's bed, the accused retorted: "Is my opinion important?"

The prosecution said the "irresistible inference" from how the accused selectively expressed his opinion on matters that benefitted him but refused to give one on matters that would implicate him was that he was an evasive witness, "desperately trying to conceal the truth".

The truth is - "that his pleaded testimony in court is fraught with red flags (which would have demanded his attention as a father worth his salt), and that the victim has absolutely no motive to frame him", said the prosecution.

DEFENCE ARGUMENTS

Lawyer Ramesh Tiwary said the defence had been "handicapped" because there were very few dates for them to work with.

However, for instances raised by the alleged victim where dates were given, the lawyers said her evidence "is not really what it is".

For one incident, he said the girl gave a very detailed account of how her father stood over her and ensured a certain message was sent. But this never happened.

"That puts a dent in the prosecution's submission that this is the witness whose evidence is so detailed and truthful," said Mr Tiwary.

He said the problem with the prosecution's arguments was that "it presupposes the assault in order to prove the assault".

He quoted Mr Khoo's statements, where he said "due consideration must be accorded to the predicament the victim found herself in when the accused, her father, committed multiple sexual offences against her".

"It assumes that this is a girl who has been abused by no one else but her father over a period of time, and therefore we must look at it from her lens," said Mr Tiwary.

"But that presupposes the very fact that we are here, that your honour has to decide, whether there were so many instances (of sexual assault)."

The girl was found to have chlamydia after the alleged offences were reported, but her father did not.

"The fact of the chlamydia, at least, seems to suggest that since the accused didn't have it, that there was some other source from which she must have gotten it," said Mr Tiwary. "But I think there is insufficient evidence to show what that other source is, or how it happened, but certainly it couldn't have been from the accused."

He urged the court to treat both the defence and prosecution witnesses with the same rules, keeping in mind that the burden was on the prosecution to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt.

"The complainant's evidence has been found wanting," said Mr Tiwary. "And it's not simply - she made a mistake, she was so traumatised that we should overlook it. Because if we accept that this is a person who has been assaulted and is in trauma, then we have already found the accused guilty, even before we have assessed the evidence."
 
Justice Valerie Thean reserved judgment and will deliver it at a later date.