The court has sentenced Tay Bee Har (63), a serial cheater who at least deceived three victims for $38,620, to 20 months imprisonment on 23 Dec.

Tay, who has been sent to jail five times for cheating since 1988, pleaded guilty to five out of 12 cheating charges.

One of her victims was a construction worker (47) from China. The court heard that she had met him at a coffee shop along Lorong 27 Geylang and they met there several times.

In September 2013, Tay began her tale that a restaurant she was working with was recruiting, and she said for a fee she could get jobs for the worker’s family or friends.

Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Vadivalagan Shanmuga said at the court, “To make her claims credible she even informed the victim that she worked for the Humanitarian Organisation for Migration Economics (HOME) and that her son was a high-ranking police officer.”

“She even showed him pictures of some people that she had taken photographs with and had said to the victim that she also knew people in the American embassy,” DPP Shanmuga added.

Believing her story, on 5 Sept 2013 the worker gave $6,000 to Tay, and five days later he handed her another $3,600 as Tay had told him that she needed a further fee for work permit applications.

Then on 14 May 2014 Tay get $1,600 from another construction worker from China, whom she conned to believe that she was an agent who can give him a job in Singapore, the Court heard.

“To make the victim further believe her ruse she even handed him a receipt confirming having received the said money,” DPP Shanmuga said.

The Court heard further, on 3 Dec 2015 Tay found another victim, also at a coffee shop, a Singaporean housewife (34) whose husband was looking for a job. Tay offered to find a job for her husband who is from India.

And in hope for the job the housewife gave to Tay $2,580.

Tay further lied that she could get jobs for seven other friends of the victim’s husband.

Tay managed to collect $15,580 between January and February 2016 from the housewife.

DPP Shanmuga charged, “To carry on her ruse, Tay also gave to the victim a receipt bearing the name of one Yap Matilda Nee Oliverio and an email address which did not belong to her. The victim only discovered that Tay was not the said Yap Matilda Nee Oliverio, much later.”

Tay was arrested not long after the third fraud but she got out on bail, then she violated bail and went to China in February. She was arrested when she came back to Singapore in July and has been remanded since.

For any of her cheating charges, Tay could have been jailed up to 10 years and fined. She has not paid back any money to her victims.

Jolovan Wham who knew Tay when she worked at HOME commented on his Facebook that she was recruited as a volunteer assigned to assist workers from China and did a fabulous job. But little did he know she was a serial conner. He wrote, “I should have read the signs when she promised me rice donations but did not deliver them! I gave a statement to the police last year and I’m glad she’s finally behind bars.”

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

Conflict of interest in Tangaraju’s case raises questions about Singapore’s legal system

Singapore executed Tangaraju Suppiah, 46, on Wednesday despite international appeals to halt the execution and review its use of capital punishment. Concerns were raised about the fairness of Tangaraju’s trial after human rights lawyer Mr M Ravi revealed a potential conflict of interest. In a Facebook post on Thursday evening, Mr Ravi expressed horror at discovering that Justice Steven Chong, who presided over Tangaraju’s appeal on Tuesday, was also the Attorney General (AG) when Tangaraju was charged on 19th May 2014. Justice Chong assumed the position of AG between 25 June 2012 to 24 June 2014. This apparent conflict of interest or appearance of biasness raises serious concerns about the fairness of the trial, as well as questions about the correct legal procedure. Mr Ravi stated in his Facebook post, “This is a travesty of justice. This is precisely the reason why a lawyer needs to be present at all stages. It is tragic that not only Tangaraju had no counsel but also did not even have a hearing where Steven J had dismissed the case summarily on Tuesday. We need answers.” The lack of legal counsel, interpreter, and circumstantial evidence against Tangaraju added to the troubling aspects of the case. Despite pleas for clemency, the execution proceeded, marking the 12th since last year.

Apex court reviews correctness of earlier decision to convict Malaysian of capital drug trafficking charge

For the second time within a few days, a 5-judge Court of…

Company directors convicted for false lodgement of information

Three company directors, N Suresh, Makhali Bin Kasmani and Wang Rui, were convicted…

What is “cannabis mixture”? Apex court revisits previous rulings once again in more than two decades

Can the Prosecution prefer two distinct drug charges – one pertaining to…