Serious Criminal case : Police work and legal process

[nayr69sg]

Why you never settle out of court. Save everyone the trouble? There is more to this story. The maid has a reason she had to resort to accusing you of molest to get something she could not have.

 

[Flustered]

It is a criminal charge that she is alleging, and I did not do it. The Police is the one charging me. How to settle out of court under these circumstances?

 

[eatshitndie]

moral of story: refrain from having a live-in maid. whenever a sinkie tells me he has a maid and maid is wrong while he is right in a case of he says she says, i'm 69% more inclined to believe the maid. when a maid is in a restroom cleaning, the tight space will warn you not to be in the same spot at the same time. it's your fault for causing her to get wet and possibly showing you her wet t-shirt and tits. although no sexual assault, that so called mistake can be construed as sexual harassment.

 

[Flustered]

I used to believe that too, until I am in this situation.

The only mistake I made was to be in the toilet for that one minute.

She did not show me her tits, neither was her T-shirt soaked. It was just a small splash of water.

 

[Debonerman]

I used to believe that too, until I am in this situation.

The only mistake I made was to be in the toilet for that one minute.

She did not show me her tits, neither was her T-shirt soaked. It was just a small splash of water.

The Police can only formally charge you with the concurrence of the AGC. As an educated person working with a stat board you of all people should have known the importance in exercising prudence in your personal conduct. To allow yourself to be inside a toilet with a female whom you have no right to be in close proximity with showed you have poor judgment or worse have ulterior intentions of a warped mind.

Your defense of your innocence is pathetic if not laughable. Your family were not in the house. You were alone with the maid. Something happened. You were accused. You got arrested. You went through a polygraph test which you did not reveal the result. You want us to believe or suggest that the maid was not interrogated and offered a polygraph as well?

Your impugning of the IO's integrity is reprehensible. This not a case of one not doing his job as in the Suntec City case. Our judicial system do not lightly put someone's future in jeopardy unless of course it concerns opposition politicians. You will face your day in Court. Face it like a man.

 

[Debonerman]

After all that is said, this could be another bullshit thread like the one of the lawyer with tenant problems.

 

[Flustered]

I thank you for your long post and your comments.

I agree that I had poor judgement, which led to this episode. I just woke up after sleeping from a night shift, and I was rushing for an appointment. That was the last thing on my mind. Anyone who have done night shift before would know.

I did not reveal the results of the polygraph because it was not revealed to me. I did not suggest that the maid was not interrogated or subjected to a polygraph. Neither did I say anything about the IO's integrity.

 

[PTADER]

I thank you bros here for your patience to read such a long post, and I welcome any enlightenment.

I will say a few things which I am sure is not to your liking and what you wish to hear. Your story does not sound right and doesn't quite add up. You got up, went into the toilet for "less than a minute" (to shave and not to brush your teeth after a long sleep), and left the door "almost closed" on the claim it was because the maid was behind the door. Others may well see it as an attempt to hide what you, in the absence of your wife and family, intended to do to the maid from the camera trained on your toilet.

Whilst the results of the polygraph test is inadmissible in court, it plays a large part in the police's decision as to whether you should be charged. That they have done so indicate you have failed your polygraph test, i.e. you lied to at least some of the critical questions asked of you. It is highly unlikely that the police will press charges against you if they feel they do not have sufficient evidence to secure a conviction.

Section 71 was repealed six years ago in 2011, so you couldn't possibly have been charged under S71. Conviction can be attained under S354 based on "intent" and need not have to be actual physical contact. The "accidental" splash may well qualify as the "criminal force" you carried out, with the "intention" to commit OM against your maid. See similar examples from the PC of what may constitute "criminal force":

Extract from Section 350
​

(e) A throws a stone, intending or knowing it to be likely that the stone will be thus brought into contact with Z, or with Z’s clothes, or with something carried by Z, or that it will strike water and dash up the water against Z’s clothes, or something carried by Z. Here if the throwing of the stone produces the effect of causing any substance to come into contact with Z, or Z’s clothes, A has used force to Z; and if he has done so without Z’s consent, intending thereby to injure, frighten or annoy Z, he has used criminal force to Z.​

​

(g) Z is bathing. A pours into the bath water which he knows to be boiling. Here A intentionally by his own bodily power causes such motion in the boiling water as brings that water into contact with Z, or with other water so situated that such contact must affect Z’s sense of feeling; A has therefore intentionally used force to Z; and if he has done this without Z’s consent, intending or knowing it to be likely that he may thereby cause injury, fear or annoyance to Z, A has used criminal force to Z.​

As I said, your whole story doesn't quite add up and IMHO, not credible. I am sure you have left out critical details or have not told the whole truth. I suspect there was actual intent to molest, if not physical contact. The questionable decisions you made and actions you took (probably out of panic), as well as your maid's shriek and post-toilet conduct and actions, could not just be due to the innocuous and "accidental" splashed water. Your wife believing your innocence and the maid not being "chio" are irrelevant.

Sorry, I am sure this is not what you want to hear. But I thought it may be helpful for you to see it from the other side of the coin. If not for anything else, it may help you with your defense strategy. If this is not a troll and you are truly innocent as you say you are, a good lawyer should be able to win the case fairly easily. So try not to stinge or save by getting a cheap but screwed up lawyer with a lousy track record. Good luck and all the best.

 

[roastgoose]

This story is not real , just some fiction.

 

[Flustered]

Thank you.

 

[twentyfour]

1. Police have to handle a plethora of cases and in these matters and without any independent witnesses are always difficult. They might have interviewed others to corroborate the version given by the complainant.
2. As above
3. These are procedural matters that will take the usual course when one aims to fight the case.

Based on what you wrote, I would suggest that you work with your lawyer to build a credible defence. It requires 2 angles to be covered - that you did not do it and what she says is false. The Court relies on who is more credible in such cases based on available evidence.

I note that she threw down a note for help. Is she given a day off?

The problem with such anecdotes is that based on only one version of events, its impossible to decide on its veracity. It seems the maid was able to face her alleged molester/attempted rapist by meeting him at his home at night (9pm) to pass him the contact of her counsellor. It also seems odd that the maid would think throwing down a note would lead anyone to read the note. It is also odd that TS can be charged just based on verbal testimony of the maid, without CCTV footage of molestation, physical evidence like semen stains, or a consistent, lucid, and convincing account by the maid that molestations had occurred on regular basis in the past.

 

[Flustered]

Agreed. That is what I find odd too. I do not have any brushes with the law other than a traffic offence.

 

[scroobal]

Agree but it does provide some indication. Omission is always an interesting and telling factor.

Sexual offences and OM in particular is one of the most difficult to handle. The number of convictions of OM in lifts in Singapore shows that its a question of veracity rather than evidence as there is unlikely to be any physical evidence. The same in buses. When is a consent a consent is the other dilemma for rape or attempted rape.

On the flip side of the coin, you cannot not prosecute for the lack of physical evidence. So it depends on the court relying on the investigation and the testimony of the witnesses, victims in the main. To your point - "a consistent, lucid and convincing account by the maid"

The maid has thus far cleared 3 steps of the smell test - the IO has been convinced to some extent, the same with his superior, and then the poly. Many cases however fail at step 1 as it not a question of just taking a statement. There is a highly interrogative process from the beginning even where victims are concerned especially when it comes to sexual allegations and the usual case of lack of physical evidence.

The problem with such anecdotes is that based on only one version of events, its impossible to decide on its veracity. It seems the maid was able to face her alleged molester/attempted rapist by meeting him at his home at night (9pm) to pass him the contact of her counsellor. It also seems odd that the maid would think throwing down a note would lead anyone to read the note. It is also odd that TS can be charged just based on verbal testimony of the maid, without CCTV footage of molestation, physical evidence like semen stains, or a consistent, lucid, and convincing account by the maid that molestations had occurred on regular basis in the past.

 

[nayr69sg]

The way flustered writes and replies is similar to ckmpd.

 

[tanwahtiu]

My suggestion is to subpenoa the agent who leave his number for you to contact him/her.

Subpenoa the maid parents to court to testify this daughter character assessment.

Subpeona those you suspects were involved in this conspiracy, the maid side.

Why do that?

Fear factor. The DPP will hv hard time to stop anyone from commit crime of perjury. One false statement from one of them will throw out the case.

The judiciary system will know the balance of probability of one of them get perjury.

Play hard ball use the judicary system to work for you crime of perjury is easy to commit. Yr lawyer will press hard to get one of them for perjury. Exchange an eye for an eye.

Again 借刀杀人. Your case is esy to entrap a conspirator to get him/her in jail.

Showtime is in the court giving evidence.

The DPP may back off if he sees you have subpenoa many people which he knows what game you play with him.

If u win the case u may claim cost from the gov or maid side. Again plant info to the maid side to claim of court cost if she lose will make her pee in her panty.

Using judicary system for vendetta or vindictive purpise are expensive game. Even if she back out u can claim cost from her. U can go to put a caveat on her parents home or sieze their home in Burma recover court cost.

Or get the agent pay court cost see if he pees too in his pant if ge lose the case.

Or go claim of those involved one by one claim court cost.

 

[PTADER]

The only mistake I made was to be in the toilet for that one minute.

Let's be honest. If the maid had not shrieked and if you had not feared that her shriek would turn into louder and more screams to be heard by other maids and your neighbours on the upper and lower floors through your open kitchen yard, would you have stayed in that toilet for just "that one minute"?

 

[PTADER]

My suggestion is to subpenoa the agent who leave his number for you to contact him/her.

Subpenoa the maid parents to court to testify this daughter character assessment.

Subpeona those you suspects were involved in this conspiracy, the maid side.

Why do that?

Fear factor. The DPP will hv hard time to stop anyone from commit crime of perjury. One false statement from one of them will throw out the case.

The judiciary system will know the balance of probability of one of them get perjury.

Play hard ball use the judicary system to work for you crime of perjury is easy to commit. Yr lawyer will press hard to get one of them for perjury. Exchange an eye for an eye.

Again 借刀杀人. Your case is esy to entrap a conspirator to get him/her in jail.

Showtime is in the court giving evidence.

The DPP may back off if he sees you have subpenoa many people which he knows what game you play with him.

If u win the case u may claim cost from the gov or maid side. Again plant info to the maid side to claim of court cost if she lose will make her pee in her panty.

Using judicary system for vendetta or vindictive purpise are expensive game. Even if she back out u can claim cost from her. U can go to put a caveat on her parents home or sieze their home in Burma recover court cost.

Or get the agent pay court cost see if he pees too in his pant if ge lose the case.

Or go claim of those involved one by one claim court cost.

Have you considered the possibility that the maid was telling the truth and that this chap did do what he has been alleged to have done?

 

[JHolmesJr]

Have you considered the possibility that the maid was telling the truth and that this chap did do what he has been alleged to have done?

would harvey spector care?

 

[Narong Wongwan]

Actually all girls are fuckable.
You just need to press the right buttons.
No need to resort to force.
A kampung chicken coming to work as maid is easy meat.
You're in deep shit now because you did not do your homework

 

[Bonut]

Actually all girls are fuckable.
You just need to press the right buttons.
No need to resort to force.
A kampung chicken coming to work as maid is easy meat.
You're in deep shit now because you did not do your homework

The Ministry of Community Development should run a "Pre-Rape or Molest Counselling Centre" and you can be the Principal Counsellor.