A doctor, Clarence Teo Shun Jie, 35, has been found guilty on Monday for locking his ex-girlfriend in a room and assaulting her.
What did she do that made him so angry? She refused him sex.
I’m not kidding around when I said assault.
Her injuries were so horrendous that the victim suffered not one but multiple facial fractures, bleeding in the brain and a fractured finger.
If the physical injuries weren’t bad enough, she also had to be treated for acute stress disorder.
Defence Argued That Teo Had An Alcoholic Blackout
Clarence Teo Shun Jie, 35, was convicted of one count each of voluntarily causing grievous hurt and wrongful confinement.
However, his defence counsel argued that Teo had suffered an alcoholic blackout and thus, could not form the intent to commit the offences.
The judge has since dismissed this argument.
Join our telegram channel for more entertaining and informative articles at https://t.me/goodyfeedsg or download the Goody Feed app here: https://goodyfeed.com/app/
What Happened
The incident occurred in the early hours of 27 August 2017. Teo had gone to his Redhill flat with his girlfriend, 27-year-old Rachel Lim En Hui.
They had returned from a night of dinner, drinks and karaoke and Teo had wanted to have sex with the victim in his bedroom.
However, she felt tired and didn’t want to.
Despite her refusal, Teo removed her shorts and penetrated her anyway while she lay motionless on the bed.
She expressed her unhappiness and said, “why is it always about what you want?” and “why don’t you care about what I want?”
That was when Teo started his assault.
He locked her in his room and continuously beat on her until the police finally saved her.
Her saviour was none other than Teo’s father who had been woken up by the noise and called the police.
The defence didn’t deny that Teo had been the one to injure the victim and that he had locked her in his bedroom, thus effectively confining her.
The only thing they argued for was that Teo had blacked out from the alcohol at the time of the offence, which means that he couldn’t have the intent to commit them.
Judge Dismissed Alcoholic Blackout Defence
According to Channel News Asia, to prove his defence, Teo had to provide objective evidence of the level of intoxication and the surrounding facts must prove that he was so intoxicated that he could not form the intent to commit the offences.
Based on the findings by both the prosecution’s and defence’s medical experts, Principal District Judge Toh Han Li found that Teo’s blood alcohol content fell between 165 to 225mg/dl at 4.12am that day, which was two hours after he returned to his flat.
This means that his blood alcohol content falls below the thresholds of 250mg/dl where alcoholic blackout has a higher chance of occurring.
The judge explains that the threshold is 300mg/dl where a person would be unconscious or in a stupor.
Since Teo was a regular drinker, Teo would likely have a better alcohol tolerance and a lower likelihood of an alcoholic blackout.
The judge also said that Teo being unable to remember what happened after the event was separate from the ability to form an intent at the time of the offence.
Teo had previously testified that he did not remember assaulting the victim.
Teo’s Father & Police Officer At The Scene Testified That Teo Didn’t Appear Drunk
Both Teo’s father and the police officer who were at the scene testified that Teo didn’t appear drunk and that they hadn’t observed him being drunk that morning.
The judge also agreed with the prosecution’s medical expert that Teo’s ability to perform actions such as driving a car, locking the door and having sexual intercourse showed his mental capacity.
Advertisements
He was also able to remember that his girlfriend performed oral sex on him while he drove and remembered having sexual intercourse at his home but allegedly couldn’t remember the assault.
Judge Toh said, “I find that the accused’s ability to recall more and more events over time rather contrived, such that by the time of the trial, it was effectively only the memory of the assault which was subject to the alcoholic blackout.”
“I also find that the targeted injuries on the victim’s face point towards the accused’s sufficient cognitive ability to aim his assault at a specific area.”
Further, if Teo truly did not have the intention, his assault and blows would’ve been unfocused and non-directed.
Wanted To “Ruin her face”
But what’s perhaps the worst of it all was that the victim testified that Teo targeted her face as he had a “deep-seated urge to … ruin (her) face” as he had told her in the past “Oh, you think you’re very pretty is it? You’re … not pretty okay?” before he assaulted her.
Advertisements
The judge did not find any material inconsistency with the victim’s evidence in court and her statement to the police.
Teo is scheduled to return to court for mitigation and sentencing for the offences he claimed trial to on 17 April.
He also faces other charges of voluntarily causing hurt, which he intends to plead guilty to.
