The Singapore court on Thursday (2 Mar) sentenced 39-year-old Joshua Robinson to four years jail for sexually assaulting two teenage girls and filming the assaults.
Channel NewsAsia (CNA) reported, Robinson pleaded guilty to nine charges: Three for sexually assaulting two 15-year-old girls, five for obscene films and one for showing an obscene film to a six-year-old girl.
He was caught in June 2015 after his second victim told her parents and made a police report against him.
Officers found and seized 5,902 X-rated films, including 321 films of child pornography while searching the MMA instructor’s apartment.
Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Nicholas Lai called Robinson a sexual predator who groomed and morally corrupted his young victims and coaxed them into having sex with him but only claimed four to five years jail for Robinson.
Many of the comments posted on CNA’s Facebook , which amounted more than 150 at the time this report was made, were vocal against the seemingly light sentence imposed upon the accused.
Faith Tan wrote,  “Why only 4 years for someone who raped 2 minors, one of them over 12 times, owning 5,902 obscene films, including 321 films of child pornography, making and possessing obscene films and one for showing an obscene film to a six-year-old girl?”
Albert Tan wrote: “The sentence is somewhere too light for this b*st*rd without canning with 4 years of imprisonment. The damaged done to the poor girls could last for a lifetime.”
Peter Utd wrote: “Deputy public prosecutor Nicholas Lai, you are a disgrace. You mean he did so many deviant acts and all together can only amount to max term of 4 to 5 years? Please lah… sure can charge him with more.”
Eunice Nge wrote, “He show a 6 year old girl sexual video while on bail! He is obviously not remorseful of his preversion acts. 4 years is too light but lets not waste our tax payers money further on feeding him on our grounds. Please send him back where he came from and ban him forever from our land.”
Sunrow Leechun wrote, “Too short as he is sick in the head. He is a repeat offender. Deport him and ban his entry to SG. Parents also need to talk to our children about being street smart and the old fashion way of not to trust strangers. At least the 6 years old girl trust her mum to tell her what happened. Bravo.”
Pierre Perrett wrote, “This sentence is an insult to justice and an embarrassment for the country. Parents should also take responsibility for lack of control over children’s internet exposure. Giving kids free access to the porn and predator-ridden web is tantamount to parental neglect, it’s like letting a child walk through a red light district alone in the middle of the night.
Jenkins Charles wrote, “Shame on your Singapore law system only 4 years why do white foreign nationals literally get away with murder.”
Yap Boon Kok wrote, “Should request the justice dept to explain why so light sentence and no caning. Our two very young Singapore citizens were raped by foreigner and the law that suppose to protect us are so lenient to a rapist. Why?”
Audrey Teo wrote, “4 years for statutory rapes? What is wrong with our jurisdictions!? I’m gutted.”
Thillai Rajan wrote, “He’ll just get a light punishment for sure! He is white n a foreigner can do whatever he wants in Singapore! As long as he maintains the economy, he’s the king right PAP?
Wan Affidz NWan Ghazali, “Bravo Singapore for the very light sentence. Only angmo got these privilege or to all FT, including PRC? Worst ‘sex offenses judicial system’ in SEA or perhaps Asia?”
Seng Boon wrote,  “My impression is that the sentence is too lenient. 2 under aged victims involved. It would be good if we could be consistent with our sentence, be it a local or foreigner.”
Cecil Tan wrote, “Nothing wrong. The system working as intended. Dun you know there a common saying in SG. There 3 set of laws here. One for the SG, one for the FT, last one for the one group who cannot be named.”
El Kun wrote, “Local = Heavy sentences. FT = Light sentences. Special = Fine only.  Welcome to it….”

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Source of new Covid-19 case in California is unknown; community spread of virus may happen in US

A confirmed case of Covid-19 of a person who appeared to not…

India-Singapore air travel bubble arrangement is not as “Singaporeans understand it to be”: CAAS

The Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) on Thursday (28 Jan) shed…

人权观察轰新法赋部长独断权 律政部反讥对方去年不敢出席听证会

《防止网络假信息和网络操纵法案》在国会经过一读,遭来国际”人权观察组织”(Human Rights Watch)抨击,该法涉及层面广泛,恐扼杀网络讨论,且部长不应赋予独断权力来裁定消息真伪。 对此,我国律政部在昨日发文告指出,直到人权观察组织准备好捍卫他们观点前,不会作进一步回应。 律政部批评,去年的蓄意散播假消息特选委会召开听证会,也有邀请该组织,但对方不敢出席面对特选会,因为自知他们的观点是“偏激、无法抗辩且毫无事实根据”。 人权组织日前发声明抨击,防止假消息法允许部长,只要认为有关消息不实,就可对全球范围任何网络内容发出“更正指示”,但是,却没有阐明部长是依据什么准则,来判断消息真伪。 “不应赋予部长独断权力” 人权观察组织亚洲助理总监罗博申称,不应赋予部长独断权力,来裁定消息真伪。再者,新加坡政府长期打压对政府、政策和领袖的批评,可见担忧“网络假消息”和“选举被操纵”的说辞是荒谬的。 在新法草案中提及,若部长认为基于公共利益,可指示相关部门对涉散播假消息者,发出更正指示。 新法案赋予政府更大权力,可强制发出假消息的个人/网路平台,更正或撤下假新闻。不愿遵守指示的机构,可被判罚款高达100万元。 此外,恶意散播假消息、损害公共利益者,可被判坐牢长达10年、罚款最高10万元。 罗博申也指出,新加坡政府似乎希望成为仲裁者,来裁定世界各地对新加坡的言论。“这项草案公然公然违反言论自由,侮辱互联网自由,世界各国政府和企业应立即呼吁新加坡撤回。”…