Arrested for theft in singapore

[crunkbabee]

Hello, a family member recently was charged with shoptheft. This is her second time getting arrested. First was an encounter at BHG and she was let off with a warning.

However 3 years later, she stole a phone. She returned the phone after to the owner and the owner called the police. Her reason in doing so was because she wanted to cover the last semester of her school fees. Her dad works odd jobs and her mom left her a year ago and she still has a brother who is studying thus times were hard for her.

Does any of you here knows what is the likely charges she will receive? she is currently 20 years old.Is there any possibilities for leniency due to her reasons? and the already returned it cus she felt guilty after that. Will she get a sentence or a fine? If so, how long and how much?

I could really use some help on this. Thank you

[sundaymorningstaple]

If she was let off with a warning "by the police" and not BHG (whatever that is) the first time, that means there will be a record of that warning. Therefore, it would appear she did not learn her lesson the first time. I'd say she should be prepared for the worst. They will probably make a example of her. Although, if her mitigation plea is sad enough she may get a reduced sentence.

Funny thing, this mitigation plea business. I'd never heard of that until I came to Singapore. Where I came from, reasons why didn't enter into it as you were either guilty or not guilty and the only thing that made any difference was the quantum based on priors and value.

[crunkbabee]

Yes thats right they found her old record. Now she is on two weeks bail and was told to come back to meet another investigation officer. I am really worried for her.

[waz]

Two mistake she made on the 2nd theft
- Stealing it.
- ANd being honest about it (returning it).

[sundaymorningstaple]

- ANd being honest about it (returning it).

That and her mitigation plea may well be the only things that will help her.

[Splatted]

However 3 years later, she stole a phone. She returned the phone after to the owner and the owner called the police. Her reason in doing so was because she wanted to cover the last semester of her school fees. Her dad works odd jobs and her mom left her a year ago and she still has a brother who is studying thus times were hard for her.

She should have looked into the possibility of a personal loan. I had a tough time as well meeting living expenses whilst studying, (food, rent, you name it)....

A $5000 loan stretched out over 5 years made all the difference (as long as you can budget and not splurge it on something silly).

[crunkbabee]

does anybody here knows whats the heaviest/lightest punishment that she could possibly receive?

[Vaucluse]

Funny thing, this mitigation plea business. I'd never heard of that until I came to Singapore. .

What also baffles me is that on appeal your sentence can be increased. Weird one, that

[ksl]

Based on the grief she is suffering of her family splitting, the mitigation factors are nearly always looked at in UK law, the max would be a fine 3 to 500$ and maybe probation. SMS this is not the US and why mitigation factors apply under the fundimentals of Singapore law, however you would be right that some laws are chnaged to suit Singapore. Though this is a minor offence still.

Though custodial sentence may well be administered for the 3rd time.

Though its important to have the defence solicitor plead the case on her behalf, and requesting some social service guidance may help, while she is struggling through the grieving period. People do silly thinks under extreme stress and stealing is one of them.

If she goes to court without a solicitor she is asking for the max penalty..... Bureaucracy looks down on people that try to buck the system by pleading ignorance of the system.

With regards to appeals, if a judge gives you a low or mid range sentence, and you have the insolence to challenge it, he will increase the penalty.

[crunkbabee]

im afraid that singapore's law are more strict. i rmbr reading somewhere the fine is usually from 3000 onwards!

[ksl]

im afraid that singapore's law are more strict. i rmbr reading somewhere the fine is usually from 3000 onwards!

Check with her solicitor, they will be the ones with the knowledge of this kind of case.

Rather than asking on a forum or assuming the worst. Though assuming the worst is the best policy! 6 months prison 2 strokes of the cane, would also be justified. Its all about doing the crime and serving the time no matter what the circumstances.

For stealing internet wireless service in Singapore the bad news!
http://www.m-indya.com/shownews.php?newsid=2469

Same case the good news!
http://www.wireless-weblog.com/50226711 ... bation.php

Mitigation factors do count, its how you convey them to the judge that will matter.

My point is there are many genuine situations, that are poorly judged by others. It takes a special kind of person to own up to stealing if they haven't been caught in the act and they need to be lightly dealt with, unless they are repeat offenders, which is another matter.

[x9200]

Funny thing, this mitigation plea business. I'd never heard of that until I came to Singapore. .

What also baffles me is that on appeal your sentence can be increased. Weird one, that

Why not? Could be new things to re(consider) for both prosecution and the defence. Could be some different opinion over the facts for the judge if different.

[brittanny]

does anybody here knows whats the heaviest/lightest punishment that she could possibly receive?

The answer is in the Penal Code Singapore :

Punishment for theft
Section 379. Whoever commits theft shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 3 years, or with fine, or with both.

Mindful however different sections of the Act deals with different categories of theft.

im afraid that singapore's law are more strict. i rmbr reading somewhere the fine is usually from 3000 onwards!

Where somewhere did u read it? I'm interested to know.

[Mad Scientist]

does anybody here knows whats the heaviest/lightest punishment that she could possibly receive?

The answer is in the Penal Code Singapore :

CHAPTER XVII
OFFENCES AGAINST property
Theft

Theft
378. Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent, moves that property in order to such taking, is said to commit theft.

Explanation 1.—A thing so long as it is attached to the earth, not being movable property, is not the subject of theft; but it becomes capable of being the subject of theft as soon as it is severed from the earth.

Explanation 2.—A moving, effected by the same act which effects the severance, may be a theft.

Explanation 3.—A person is said to cause a thing to move by removing an obstacle which prevented it from moving, or by separating it from any other thing, as well as by actually moving it.

Explanation 4.—A person, who by any means causes an animal to move, is said to move that animal, and to move everything which in consequence of the motion so caused is moved by that animal.

Explanation 5.—The consent mentioned in the definition may be express or implied, and may be given either by the person in possession, or by any person having for that purpose authority either express or implied.

Illustrations

(a) A cuts down a tree on Z’s ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of Z’s possession without Z’s consent. Here, as soon as A has severed the tree, in order to such taking, he has committed theft.

(b) A puts a bait for dogs in his pocket, and thus induces Z’s dog to follow it. Here, if A’s intention be dishonestly to take the dog out of Z’s possession without Z’s consent, A has committed theft as soon as Z’s dog has begun to follow A.

(c) [Deleted by Act 51 of 2007]

(d) A, being Z’s servant and entrusted by Z with the care of Z’s plate, dishonestly runs away with the plate without Z’s consent. A has committed theft.

(e) Z, going on a journey, entrusts his plate to A, the keeper of a warehouse, till Z shall return. A carries the plate to a goldsmith and sells it. Here the plate was not in Z’s possession. It could not, therefore, be taken out of Z’s possession, and A has not committed theft, though he may have committed criminal breach of trust.

(f) A finds a ring belonging to Z on a table in the house which Z occupies. Here the ring is in Z’s possession, and if A dishonestly removes it, A commits theft.

(g) A finds a ring lying on the high road, not in the possession of any person. A by taking it commits no theft, though he may commit criminal misappropriation of property.

(h) A sees a ring belonging to Z lying on a table in Z’s house. Not venturing to misappropriate the ring immediately for fear of search and detection, A hides the ring in a place where it is highly improbable that it will ever be found by Z, with the intention of taking the ring from the hiding place and selling it when the loss is forgotten. Here A, at the time of first moving the ring, commits theft.

(i) A delivers his watch to Z, a jeweller, to be regulated. Z carries it to his shop. A, not owing to the jeweller any debt for which the jeweller might lawfully detain the watch as a security, enters the shop openly, takes his watch by force out of Z’s hand, and carries it away. Here A, though he may have committed criminal trespass and assault, has not committed theft, inasmuch as what he did was not done dishonestly.

(j) If A owes money to Z for repairing the watch, and if Z retains the watch lawfully as a security for the debt, and A takes the watch out of Z’s possession, with the intention of depriving Z of the property as a security for his debt, he commits theft, inasmuch as he takes it dishonestly.

(k) Again, if A having pawned his watch to Z, takes it out of Z’s possession without Z’s consent, not having paid what he borrowed on the watch, he commits theft, though the watch is his own property, inasmuch as he takes it dishonestly.

(l) A takes an article belonging to Z out of Z’s possession, without Z’s consent, with the intention of keeping it until he obtains money from Z as a reward for its restoration. Here A takes dishonestly; A has therefore committed theft.

(m) A, being on friendly terms with Z, goes into Z’s library in Z’s absence and takes away a book, without Z’s express consent, for the purpose merely of reading it, and with the intention of returning it. Here, it is probable that A may have conceived that he had Z’s implied consent to use Z’s book. If this was A’s impression, A has not committed theft.

(n) A asks charity from Z’s wife. She gives A money, food and clothes, which A knows to belong to Z, her husband. Here, it is probable that A may conceive that Z’s wife is authorised to give away alms. If this was A’s impression, A has not committed theft.

(o) A is the paramour of Z’s wife. She gives A valuable property, which A knows to belong to her husband Z, and to be such property as she has no authority from Z to give. If A takes the property dishonestly, he commits theft.

(p) A in good faith, believing property belonging to Z to be A’s own property, takes that property out of B’s possession. Here, as A does not take dishonestly, he does not commit theft.
[51/2007]

[Indian PC 1860, s. 378]

Punishment for theft
379. Whoever commits theft shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 3 years, or with fine, or with both.

[Indian PC 1860, s. 379]

Punishment for theft of a motor vehicle
379A. —(1) Whoever commits theft of a motor vehicle or any component part of a motor vehicle shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 7 years, and shall also be liable to fine.
[23/84;51/2007]

(2) A person convicted of an offence under this section shall, unless the court for special reasons thinks fit to order otherwise, be disqualified for such period as the court may order from the date of his release from imprisonment from holding or obtaining a driving licence under the Road Traffic Act (Cap. 276).
[51/2007]

(3) In this section —

"component part" , in relation to a motor vehicle, means any component part attached to the motor vehicle, and includes any tyre, accessory or equipment attached to the motor vehicle;

"motor vehicle" means a mechanically propelled vehicle intended or adapted for use on roads, and includes a trailer drawn by a motor vehicle.

[51/2007]

Theft in dwelling-house, etc.
380. Whoever commits theft in any building, tent or vessel, which building, tent or vessel is used as a human dwelling, or for the custody of property, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 7 years, and shall also be liable to fine.

[Indian PC 1860, s. 380]

Theft by clerk or servant of property in possession of master
381. Whoever, being a clerk or servant, or being employed in the capacity of a clerk or servant, commits theft in respect of any property in the possession of his master or employer, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 7 years, and shall also be liable to fine.

[Indian PC 1860, s. 381]

Theft after preparation made for causing death or hurt in order to commit theft
382. Whoever commits theft, having made preparation for causing death or hurt or restraint, or fear of death or of hurt or of restraint, to any person in order to commit such theft, or in order to effect his escape after committing such theft, or in order to retain property taken by such theft, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 10 years, and shall also be punished with caning with not less than 3 strokes.
[62/73]

Illustrations

(a) A commits theft of property in Z’s possession; and, while committing this theft, he has a loaded pistol under his garment, having provided this pistol for the purpose of hurting Z in case Z should resist. A has committed the offence defined in this section.

(b) A picks Z’s pocket, having posted several of his companions near him, in order that they may restrain Z, if Z should perceive what is passing and should resist, or should attempt to apprehend A. A has committed the offence defined in this section.

[Indian PC 1860, s. 382]

This is the extract of the penal code from Singapore Statues on Line

[aster]

What also baffles me is that on appeal your sentence can be increased. Weird one, that

I thought this was pretty common elsewhere. You're basically asking for a reevaluation so there is always some risk involved, otherwise it would make sense to appeal every single case possible as... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aj4wcuo9Mgo