Australian admits throwing glass bottle that killed elderly Singaporean man

UPDATE: The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) issued a statement on the sentencing consideration behind Andrew Gosling’s offences

SINGAPORE — An intoxicated Australian man who was upset at terrorist attacks against his compatriots in other countries, and wanted to startle a group of Malays having a barbecue in his condominium, hurled a glass wine bottle at a table in the area.

The bottle fell down two floors and struck an elderly Malay man on his head, killing him. The bottle then ricocheted onto the man’s wife’s shoulder before landing on the floor unbroken.

In a hearing at the State Courts on Friday (25 February), the court heard that Andrew Gosling, 49, then fled to his unit. He denied any knowledge of the incident to investigators who came to his doorstep at Spottiswoode 18 condominium.

Ahead of the incident, Gosling had also thought of using a weapon, such as a gun, to shoot at the group but dismissed the thought as he felt it would be a heinous act.

Gosling admitted to one count of causing death through a rash act, and one count of causing grievous hurt through a rash act. He entered Singapore on 15 July 2019 to find employment but was unemployed at the time of the offences.

Accused had been drinking

On 18 August 2019, Gosling had lunch and a pint of beer before returning to his condominium to have a swim at the swimming pool on the fifth floor. While swimming, he saw a group of people having a barbecue next to the pool area.

A while later, Gosling left the condominium to have dinner, where he consumed two 640ml bottles of beer. He returned to his unit where he drank a can of beer at his balcony, which overlooked the pool area. He noticed the group again and saw that they comprised Malay Muslims, as he saw several women wearing headscarves.

The victims, a couple who were married for 45 years, were present in the group of about 10 to 15 people. This was when Gosling got the idea to shoot at the group but later dismissed it.

Shortly afterwards, Gosling left his unit to throw rubbish at a chute on the same floor. From there, he could see the barbecue area and the victims. He then picked up a glass wine bottle at the area, which measured about 30cm and weighed 0.6kg, held the bottle by its neck and flung it downwards toward a table at the BBQ area.

The glass sailed about 18 metres and landed on the 73-year-old man’s head. It bounced off and hit his wife, 69, on the right shoulder. The bottle landed on the ground unbroken. The man fainted while his wife could not lift her right arm.

Meanwhile, Gosling ran back to his unit while shouting offensive words, which were redacted from court documents.

The elderly man was conveyed to hospital where he died the next morning from head injuries, including multiple skull fractures. His wife sustained extensive bruises over her right shoulder and a skin abrasion. She wore her arm in a sling for around two months and was unable to carry out her daily activities for about 20 days after the incident.

Police interviewed accused multiple times

For the 10 days following the incident, the police conducted over 200 interviews with residents of the condominium and recorded statements from them. They recorded statements from the victim’s next of kin and collected DNA swabs.

Throughout their investigations, police officers spoke with Gosling at least three times. Gosling denied hearing any commotion or recognising the wine bottle.

On 23 August 2019, Gosling was asked to present himself for a statement recording, during which he said he read about the incident on the news and did not admit to the offence. After Gosling was asked to provide a DNA sample and fingerprints to the police, he realised that the wine bottle could now be traced to him.

He surrendered to the police on 28 August 2019.

Psychiatrist's report

Gosling was assessed by an Institute of Mental Health psychiatrist and a private psychiatrist, who jointly produced a report.

While Gosling was deemed to be inebriated, the amount of alcohol he consumed was within his usual limit. The effect of his intoxication would not have been severe enough to remove any culpability for the offence. However, the level of alcohol did contribute to some impairment of his judgement. Whenever Gosling was drunk, he would be prone to obsessive negative thoughts, which “did not represent (his) true feelings and intentions”, the report said.

Gosling’s state of mind while intoxicated was “not genuinely reflective of anti-Muslim sentiments”, the psychiatrists assessed, which meant that the offences were "unlikely to be religiously motivated".

In mitigation, Gosling’s lawyers – Senior Counsel Sreenivasan, S Balamurugan, Gloria James and Kevin Liew – urged the court not to treat the offence as a religious hate crime.

Addressing District Judge Victor Yeo, Sreenivasan said that he was disappointed that the prosecution made the offence to be religiously motivated, despite what the expert psychiatrists had stated.

Gosling had no intention to harm the deceased or his family and committed the offence in "pure rashness", said Sreenivasan. Gosling has since vowed to quit alcohol. He has also offered voluntarily compensation, which was accepted by the victims' family even though they had not sought compensation.

Sreenivasan told the court that the victims’ family has also "exhibited their grace and incredible act of forgiveness" to Gosling.

The prosecution, represented by Deputy Public Prosectors G Kannan, Thiagesh Sukumaran and Ben Mathias Tan, sought seven years’ jail for Gosling, while the defence lawyers asked for two to three years' jail.

Gosling's sentencing has been adjourned to 8 April. His parents, who had flown in from Australia and were present in court, were granted permission to speak to him for a while.

AGC's statement

In a statement issued after the hearing, the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) said Gosling’s offences were more egregious than an act of "killer litter" and also religiously aggravated as he showed religious hostility towards Muslims.

Calling his actions "outrageous, senseless and appalling", the AGC said, "In particular, he threw the bottle towards the area at which the group was gathered because he had noticed that members of the group were Muslim. He ran from the scene after throwing the bottle to evade detection, shouting crude, religiously-charged vulgarities about Muslims."

Given the overall criminality of Gosling’s actions and that the offence was religiously aggravated, the prosecution sought a total of seven years’ jail for Gosling, the AGC added.

Stay in the know on-the-go: Join Yahoo Singapore's Telegram channel at http://t.me/YahooSingapore