Mother seeks justice in complex Singapore school sexual assault case amid institutional silence

A harrowing saga unfolds at the Singapore American School, where a mother, Ms Fang, relentlessly seeks justice for her daughter, identified as V, in a case that sheds light on the intricate challenges within Singapore’s educational and legal systems regarding sexual assault allegations and the potential abuse of the Protection Against Harassment Act (POHA).

The Incident and School’s Investigation

On 3 March 2021, Ms Fang’s daughter, V, a minor at the time, reported being sexually harassed by a Teaching Assistant (TA). According to Ms Fang, the TA made unwarranted physical contact with V, touching her bare thigh for around 20 seconds in a ceramics class. This incident occurred under strict COVID-19 social distancing rules.

The school conducted a seven-week internal investigation with the aid of an external law firm, TSMP, acknowledging physical contact but ultimately concluding it did not constitute sexual harassment.

This decision, which contradicted the evident inappropriateness and preventability of the contact as per their reports, baffled Ms Fang.

After the TSMP report was ready, SAS also allegedly tried to have Ms Fang’s family sign a Non-Disclosure Undertaking (NDU).

“We refused to sign the NDU believing other parents & students have the right to know how such cases are handled,” wrote Ms Fang on her website of the whole ordeal.

Legal Proceedings and the POHA Lawsuit

Following the school’s response, V filed a police report for “Outrage of Modesty” in May 2021. Despite this, the TA was not suspended and remained at the school.

Ms Fang subsequently launched a petition for a “zero-tolerance policy against sexual harassment” at SAS, garnering 250 signatures from the SAS community within two weeks.

Faced with public outrage, SAS Superintendent Mr Thomas Boasberg released a truncated version of the TSMP investigation report to the SAS community.

According to Ms Fang, in this report, the TA lied, and his statements contradicted both the two SAS investigation reports and V’s written statement.

It was also pointed out that the publicly released TSMP report omitted the entire Annex B, which included the victim’s written statement and both SAS investigation reports confirming the physical contact.

“When I raised the issue with SAS, they provided a Table of Contents for Annex B. This revealed that TSMP hadn’t even been provided with SAS’s HR Definition for Sexual Harassment,” pointed out Ms Fang.

From October 2021 to April 2022, the Outrage of Modesty (OM) investigation against the TA resulted in a No-further-action (NFA) decision, leaving V’s family puzzled by the outcome, especially considering the severity of the allegations.

In October 2021, V underwent a psychiatric evaluation, which confirmed that she suffered from Adjustment Disorder and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) as a result of the incident. These findings were submitted to the authorities.

The petition also led to a POHA lawsuit filed by the TA, alleging harassment due to the petition.

Surprisingly, despite the general nature of the petition and redacted names, the lawsuit was taken forward.

During the legal proceedings, Ms Fang discovered alleged false evidence presented by the TA’s legal team.

Ms Fang pointed out the alleged falsehoods on her website, which included lying about not having touched V when Mr. Boasberg admitted that the complaint was not baseless and claiming that a search of the TA’s name would show the petition link, when there had been no mention of the TA’s name anywhere in the petition.

On 8 Dec 2021, after the TA received knowledge of NFA from the OM case, his lawyer offered to settle the POHA case, asking for S$10K to permanently take down the website and not talk about the case.

Ms Fang refused and opted for a trial. However, unfortunately for Ms Fang, the case concluded in March 2023 with the court ruling in favour of the TA, mandating Ms Fang to pay S$20,000, a decision that Ms Fang fears sets a dangerous precedent in the legal system.

“This ruling, if uncontested, will effectively set a legal precedent of “HOW TO MOLEST A CHILD, AND GET PAID!”  in Singapore.” wrote Ms Fang on her website.

AGC’s Response and Ms Fang’s Appeal for Transparency

Ms Fang has since written to the AGC about the evidence of the alleged perjury by the TA in the OM and POHA case.

The AGC, in response to Ms Fang’s queries about the handling of the case, stated on 26 October: “Following the completion of investigations into the Police Report, the Singapore Police Force informed Ms Zhou on 27 November 2021 that no further action would be taken in relation to the report.”

In response to Ms Fang’s lawyers requesting that the decision not to take any further action with respect to the Police Report be reviewed, the AGC replied to the correspondence on 7 March 2022 and 14 April 2022 to state that it would be maintaining its decision not to take any further action.

“We have considered the contents of your letter sent via email dated 21 October 2023. We regret to inform you that we will not be taking further action in this matter.” wrote AGC.

In response, Ms Fang reached out to the Minister of Home Affairs and Law, K Shanmugam, on 28 October, expressing her dismay and seeking further explanation, especially regarding the perjury evidence she submitted on 20 October.

Her persistence continued with a follow-up on 11 November, requesting specific answers about potential obstruction of justice by the school, the handling of perjury evidence, and the AGC’s consideration of the school’s internal reports.

Lack of Response and Growing Concerns

To date, there has been no comprehensive response to Ms Fang’s latest inquiries, nor from Gutzy Asia’s request for comments from the Singapore American School in response to the allegations put forth by Ms Fang.

This ongoing silence raises critical questions about the transparency and effectiveness of institutional and legal processes in handling sensitive cases like this and the potential abuse of POHA by perpetrators against their victims.