NUS molester back in court for prosecution's appeal against probation

Was he a good man who simply took a wrong turn?

Or is he living two different lives - one in public and the other in private?

These questions troubled Chief Justice (CJ) Sundaresh Menon yesterday, as he heard the prosecution's appeal against the sentence of National University of Singapore (NUS) student Terence Siow Kai Yuan.

Siow, who sat silently in the High Court yesterday, was convicted last year of molesting a 28-year-old woman on an MRT station escalator.

District Judge Jasvender Kaur gave him 21 months of supervised probation.

Two other charges for touching the woman's thigh were taken into consideration.

Judge Kaur had noted Siow's academic results and his "potential to excel in life".

But many questioned whether the sentence was adequate.

Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam took to social media two days after the verdict, expressing his surprise at the sentence, but said the public should avoid casting aspersions on the judge.

Yesterday, the prosecution urged CJ Menon to jail Siow for at least three weeks.

The main point of contention was whether Siow showed an "extremely strong propensity for reform" and could then be considered for probation, which is usually given to youthful offenders or in exceptional circumstances.

Siow was 22 when he committed the offences, and CJ Menon said he was not a youthful offender.

Deputy Public Prosecutor Kristy Tan argued that Siow's good academic performance was not necessarily indicative of a strong propensity for reform.

She added that family support did not feed into propensity for reform, as Siow, an only child, is turning 25 this year.

"The parents can't accompany him every time he takes public transport," she said.

The DPP also said that Siow appeared to manage having the pro-social aspects of his life outwardly, while being a porn addict and sex offender at the same time.

"The two aspects of his person are not incompatible," she said.

"What does being able to do well in life necessarily mean for his ability or willingness to correct the sexual offending part?"

Siow's lawyer Raphael Louis said Siow was remorseful, took steps to change, and his parents want to be involved in his life.

But CJ Menon said: "Saying that he has expressed remorse... that's the first step, but what is it about this offender that points to exceptional propensity for reform?

"Almost every parent would say the same thing. I don't think that translates to very much."

Mr Louis then referred to a report from NUS' counselling services, but the judge said he wanted to see a report from the NUS psychiatrist whom the lawyer claims Siow consulted following the offences.

Mr Louis claimed they had written to NUS, which declined to give the report on the basis of client confidentiality.

The judge said he found this perplexing, and asked the lawyer to ask for the report again, this time with the weight of the court behind the request.

CJ Menon said he found the dichotomy between Siow's public and private lives worrying, and it was unclear to him whether Judge Kaur completely considered these aspects.

He will give his judgment at a later date.

Siow remains a free man pending the outcome of the appeal.