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

Parliament questions on CPF protest might be sub-judice: M Ravi

By Andrew Loh Two Members of Parliament (MPs) have raised questions about…

败选后 黄志明才想起该收紧就业准证?

据了解,全国职工总会秘书长黄志明坦言,针对外籍人士在本地就业,国人的焦虑确有提升,也建议政府或应缩紧就业准证(Employment Pass)政策。 他在前日接受《海峡时报》采访,声称职总就业保障联盟(Job Security Council)迄今协助超过2万工友,在疫情下匹配到新工作。 与此同时,他仍强调建设和扩张新加坡经济牵涉国人利益,仍需要外籍人士的技术和才能,来增强本地劳动力。 他也指若就业竞争某种程度上变得激烈,政府理应出台政策来保障国人能公平地取得好工作。 黄志明原是总理公署部长,在2020选举,偕同原交通部兼卫生部高级政务部长蓝彬明医生、内政部兼卫生部高级政务次长安宁·阿敏等人,上阵盛港集选区,惟不敌工人党何廷儒团队败选。 据了解,在选举之前,黄志明鲜少有提及,有关调整或缩紧外籍人士就业政策的建议。 全国工资理事会将召开第二次会议,黄志明则希望该理事会能尽量保住就业,保障特别是低薪工友群体的福利。 有鉴于冠病疫情对经济的影响,他预计未来半年至一年,失业仍会持续攀升。 职总在上月推出公平裁员框架,并声称保障职场的新加坡核心,惟拥有关键技术的外籍人士也能留下。…

Administering Fairness

~ By Wong Wee Nam ~ Recently 44 (and more) people were…

再有三名马籍巴士司机状告新捷运

再有三名巴士司机,向本地巴士业者新捷运(SBS Transit)另一起诉讼,指责后者在加班和休假日工酬上涉嫌“违反雇佣法令”。 Carson律师楼在脸书证实上述诉讼,并透露上述巴士司机都是马国人,刚在上周向推事庭提呈诉状。他们的申诉也和此前的五名巴士司机一样。 该律师楼律师拉维(M RAVI)将代表他们申诉。 在今年九月底,五名巴士司机分别状告本地巴士业者新捷运,指责后者违反加班工酬条款,支付不足工酬。 原告指责他们被预期在休假日之前,可“连续7日工作无休”,这不符合双方同意的聘任书,故此可能违反《雇佣法》36条,即员工理应每周获得休息日,或者值班超过30小时理应获休假。 他们也控诉,被要求“每周工作超过44小时”,认为这违反《雇佣法》规定的法定工时。 新捷运在10月18日,宣布把上述薪资诉讼,申请从推事庭转移到工业仲裁庭(IAC)审理。诉讼在11月4日开审,诠释新捷运和全国交通工友联合会(NTWU)签署的集体协定中,有关超时工作和休息日的条款,是否符合法律规定。 不过,根据法官书面判决,指新捷运在休息日、超时工作薪酬和工时方面,未违反上述集体协定。 法官是根据新捷运提供的雇佣合同、轮值表和薪酬计算样本作判断,也指休息日条款也未违反雇佣法。 在此前的听证上新捷运指,据雇佣法一些重要服务领域如公共交通,该公司可要求司机工作超过法定工时。…