NSF sentenced to 12 years, 9 months for raping deaf 13-year-old girl

A deaf and speech-impaired 13-year-old girl was raped by a trusted adult while in the care of his family, suffering physical injuries including bite marks and forearm injuries.
She did not want to be the cause of a family breakup
The victim chose silence to protect her attacker's marriage, even after he raped her.
Mark

Why did the girl not tell the wife what happened, even after she came home and interrupted the assault?

Mimi

She was protecting the family. She didn't want to be the reason their marriage broke apart, and the wife was pregnant. A 13-year-old, deaf and unable to speak, made a choice about someone else's wellbeing before her own.

Mark

The man's defense argued he hadn't exploited her disability. What does that even mean in this context?

Mimi

It means they were trying to separate the assault from the fact that she was deaf. But the judge saw it clearly—her deafness made her more trapped, not less. She couldn't hear him coming, couldn't call for help. The disability wasn't incidental. It was part of what made her vulnerable.

Mark

He was AWOL from military service. How does that connect to the rape?

Mimi

It doesn't, directly. But it shows a pattern. He was supposed to report for duty in October 2023. He didn't. He stayed absent for over a year, working as a cleaner instead. The judge saw someone who solved his problems by running away, not facing them. That same person then assaulted a child in his care.

Mark

The girl texted his wife for help during the assault. Did that text save her?

Mimi

It stopped the assault, yes. But it didn't prevent it. She had already been molested, pulled toward the bed, raped. The text was a lifeline she threw out while drowning. His wife came home and interrupted him, but the damage was already done.

Mark

What does 12 years and nine months mean for someone who was 22 when he did this?

Mimi

He'll be in his mid-thirties when he gets out. His child, born while he was in remand, will be a teenager. His wife will have raised their son alone. The victim will have to live with what happened to her for the rest of her life.

  • A deaf thirteen-year-old, left alone with a trusted adult for the first time, was raped in a flat while his pregnant wife ran errands — and managed to secretly text that wife for help mid-assault.
  • The offender had already been absent without leave from national service for over a year, living outside the structures meant to hold him accountable, before the morning the crime occurred.
  • When his wife returned and confronted him, he lied — claiming the girl had threatened him with a kitchen knife — while instructing the victim to wash away the evidence.
  • The girl stayed silent that evening to protect a pregnant woman's family, but her injuries spoke: relatives saw the bite mark and forearm wound, and police were called the next morning.
  • Justice Andre Maniam rejected every argument that minimized the victim's disability or the offender's culpability, sentencing him to 12 years 9 months and 12 strokes of the cane — a ruling that placed the full weight of the law on the betrayal of trust.

In a Singapore courtroom in August 2026, a young national serviceman was sentenced to nearly thirteen years in prison and caning for the rape of a deaf and speech-impaired thirteen-year-old girl — a child placed in his care through bonds of family trust. The case lays bare how vulnerability compounds violation: the girl could neither hear danger approaching nor cry out for help, and yet she resisted, texted for rescue, and endured. The court's judgment refused to let remorse, hardship, or the passage of time diminish what was done to her.

On the morning of November 2, 2024, a thirteen-year-old deaf girl was raped inside a two-room flat in Singapore. She had been left there overnight by her mother, who trusted the couple — the wife was close to the girl's family — to keep her safe. When the wife stepped out to run errands, the man beckoned the girl into the bedroom. She refused. He persisted through typed messages on her phone, then offered money. When he began assaulting her, she found a moment to text his wife: her husband wanted to have sex with her. She needed help. He raped her anyway. Only the sound of a key in the lock made him stop.

The girl said nothing to the wife that evening. The woman was four to five months pregnant, and the girl did not want to be the cause of a family's unraveling. But her body carried the evidence — a bite mark on her neck, an injury to her forearm. Relatives noticed. That night, she pointed to a photo of the man and indicated he had given her the mark. Her mother called police the following morning. He was arrested the same day.

Nearly two years later, on August 5, 2026, the man — now 24 — was sentenced to 12 years and nine months in jail and 12 strokes of the cane. He had pleaded guilty to aggravated statutory rape and being absent without leave from national service, a posting he had abandoned for over a year before the assault. His child was born while he was in remand. He offered apologies and spoke of religious counseling.

Justice Andre Maniam was unmoved. The defense had argued that the girl's deafness had not been exploited — after all, she had communicated her refusal and managed to text for help. The judge rejected this framing entirely: because she was deaf, she could not hear anyone approaching the flat, and she could not call out. Her safety had been entrusted to this man, and he had destroyed it. The court also dismissed his claim that financial hardship had driven him to go AWOL, noting that servicemen in difficulty have proper channels — commanders, welfare systems — not the option of simply disappearing. Neither remorse nor time served could soften what the circumstances demanded.

A 13-year-old deaf girl texted for help while being raped in a flat on the morning of November 2, 2024. The assault stopped only when the man's pregnant wife returned home and began unlocking the door. By then, the damage was done—a bite mark on the girl's neck, an injury to her forearm, and a violation that would reshape the lives of everyone involved.

The man who committed this crime was 22 at the time, a full-time national serviceman who had been absent without leave from his military posting for over a year. He knew the victim through her older brother, whom he had attended secondary school with. More importantly, his wife was close to the girl's family—a goddaughter relationship that created a web of trust. When the victim's mother needed to attend an event on November 2, she arranged for her daughter to stay overnight at the couple's two-room flat. It was the girl's first time there.

The next morning, the wife left to run errands. She was four to five months pregnant. The man then beckoned the girl into the bedroom and asked her to have sex with him. She refused. He persisted by typing messages on her phone. When she continued to say no, he offered to pay her. He molested her and pulled her toward the bed. At some point during the assault, the girl managed to secretly text his wife: her husband wanted to have sex with her. She needed help. The man then raped her. She struggled to escape but could not overpower him. Only when his wife's key turned in the lock did he stop. He told the girl to wash herself quickly in the toilet. When confronted, he lied—he claimed the girl had grown angry and taken a knife from the kitchen, that he had showered and gone to bed.

The girl did not tell the wife what had happened. She did not want to be the cause of a family breakup, and the woman was pregnant. That evening, her mother picked her up. Relatives noticed the injuries—the bite mark, the forearm wound. When questioned, the girl showed them a photo of the man and indicated he had given her the mark on her neck. Her mother called police on November 3. He was arrested that same day.

On August 5, 2026, the man—now 24—was sentenced to 12 years and nine months in jail and 12 strokes of the cane. He had pleaded guilty to aggravated statutory rape and being absent without leave. Two additional charges were taken into consideration. The prosecution had sought between 12 years four months and 13 years, plus caning. The defense had argued for 10 to 10 and a half years. Justice Andre Maniam rejected the defense's framing that the girl's deafness had not been exploited. He noted that because she was deaf, she could not hear people approaching the flat and could not call out for help. The victim's safety had been entrusted to both the man and his wife, and then to him alone when his wife left.

The man's lawyer had argued there was no evidence he had exploited the girl's disability, pointing out that despite her condition, she had communicated her refusal and had managed to text for help. The judge rejected this reasoning. He also rejected the man's mitigation plea—his claim that he had gone AWOL due to financial hardship and had taken work as a cleaner. Maniam said that national servicemen facing money troubles should inform their commanders and seek aid through proper channels, not abandon their posts. The man had spent two years in remand. His child was born while he was detained. He apologized to the victim, his wife, and his family, and said he had pursued religious counseling. The judge found none of this warranted a reduction in sentence. The crime, the circumstances, the vulnerability of the victim—these could not be softened by remorse or time served.

The victim's safety had been entrusted to both the man and his wife, and then to him alone when his wife left the flat.
— Justice Andre Maniam, in sentencing remarks
National servicemen facing financial hardship should inform their commanders and seek aid through proper channels, not abandon their posts.
— Justice Andre Maniam, rejecting the man's mitigation plea
Envie de l'histoire complète ? Lire l'original sur CNA ↗
Nous contacter FAQ