Man appeals against reformative training for organising illicit drug gathering, which led to NUS student’s death
Jonas Anderson, 20, was sentenced to six months of reformative training in November last year and has since filed an appeal against the sentence.
BY LOUISA TANG
Published February 14, 2020
Updated February 14, 2020
SINGAPORE — After taking “acid” with a group of friends, a 19-year-old medical student from the National University of Singapore began fidgeting violently and behaving unusually, hitting his hands and legs against the ground.
He was eventually pronounced dead in the hospital a few hours later.
The cause of death: the toxicity from 25B-NBOMe, a novel psychedelic substance and controlled drug, also known by its street name “acid”.
The polytechnic student who had organised the illicit drug gathering, 20-year-old Jonas Andersen, was sentenced to six months of reformative training in November last year.
He has since filed an appeal against the sentence.
Reformative training — a regimented rehabilitation programme for offenders under the age of 21 who commit relatively serious crimes — is a harsher punishment than probation, which allows young offenders to continue with their education or employment while serving their sentences.
In his grounds of decision released last week, District Judge Eddy Tham said that Andersen “needs to show more than just an expression of remorse” by changing his behaviour and actions.
Following the fatal incident in September 2018, he was charged and released on court bail but broke the law again by taking ecstasy.
The judge noted: “Any remorse or horror felt by the accused as a result of the death of his friend had little lasting effect on the accused.
“Instead of completely turning away from controlled drugs and any negative peers, the accused continued to associate with such peers leading to him committing another offence of consumption barely six months after the tragic incident.”
WHAT HAPPENED
Andersen pleaded guilty in a district court to three charges of consuming controlled and specified drugs, as well as arranging and planning the gathering.
The court earlier heard that he invited two friends over to his Tanah Merah home on Sept 15, 2018 to “trip” together — a slang word referring to the act of consuming “acid”.
ADVERTISEMENT
One of his friends invited medical student Yong Zixian when Andersen said he wanted to take drugs with more people. Andersen also told them to collect five tabs of 25B-NBOMe from a drug supplier whom Andersen knew.
At about 1am, the five young men went to a playground near Andersen’s home. All of them, save for Yong, first smoked some cannabis that Andersen had brought before they took the “acid”.
They placed one tab each under their tongues and left it there for a while before swallowing it and then returning to Andersen’s house.
Yong began behaving strangely sometime later. Andersen’s parents called for an ambulance and Yong was taken to Changi General Hospital, where he was pronounced dead at about 5.45am.
Andersen was arrested later that day as part of follow-up investigations for a coroner’s inquiry into Yong’s death.
ADVERTISEMENT
While out on bail, he was arrested by narcotics officers again on March 4 last year. He admitted to taking an ecstasy tablet three days earlier, claiming that he felt euphoric afterwards.
‘COMMITTED A VERY SERIOUS OFFENCE’
Deputy Public Prosecutor Gabriel Lim sought the sentence imposed, noting that Anderson would have been given at least five years’ jail if he was sentenced as an adult, and after taking the aggravating factors of the case into account.
Arranging and planning a gathering where controlled drugs are consumed carries a minimum mandatory imprisonment of three years’ jail, with the possibility of caning.
Andersen’s lawyer Remy Choo, who asked for probation instead, argued that the probation officer found Andersen suitable for it.
His father had also taken a year off work to keep an eye on him and he had been going for treatment, the lawyer added.
In his grounds of decision, District Judge Tham said that Andersen had “committed a very serious offence” and that a young life was lost as a direct result of his actions.
ADVERTISEMENT
Furthermore, he had re-offended despite expressing remorse for the fatal incident and undergoing psychotherapy for about four months, the judge pointed out.
Even though Andersen’s parents were supportive after his initial offence, the judge said that this proved ineffective as well.
"He had admitted to the probation officer… that after his initial arrest, he had thought that he would be able to resist further temptation. Hence, he did not think much about continuing association with peers who also consumed drugs.
“Thus when a friend offered him the drug, he was unable to resist the temptation and consumed the drug. This inability to steer clear from negative influence resulted in him re-offending,” District Judge Tham added.
The more serious the offence, the greater the onus is on a young offender to show strong rehabilitative potential before he or she can get probation, the judge concluded.
