High Court judge raps driver over 'reprehensible' conduct to evade liability after fatal crash

As a result of car driver Thien Chin Tin’s actions, motorcycle rider Aw Yong Chyn Long, who could not afford a lawyer, pleaded guilty to a criminal charge in April 2016 and was fined $2,500 despite a discrepancy in a prosecution document. (Photo: Getty Images)
As a result of car driver Thien Chin Tin’s actions, motorcycle rider Aw Yong Chyn Long, who could not afford a lawyer, pleaded guilty to a criminal charge in April 2016 and was fined $2,500 despite a discrepancy in a prosecution document. (Photo: Getty Images)

A High Court judge castigated a car driver involved in a crash in 2014 that caused the death of a motorcycle pillion rider three years later, calling his actions to stage-manage the accident scene and push the blame to the motorcycle rider as “reprehensible”.

As a result of car driver Thien Chin Tin’s actions, motorcycle rider Aw Yong Chyn Long, who could not afford a lawyer, pleaded guilty to a criminal charge in April 2016 and was fined $2,500 despite a discrepancy in a prosecution document.

Aw’s pillion rider, Shoo Hui Meng, never regained consciousness after the accident on 27 June 2014. She died on 19 August last year.

Shoo’s husband, Sim Tian Siang, commenced a civil suit against Aw and Thien on his wife’s behalf.

Senior Judge (SJ) Lai Siu Chiu, who heard the case earlier this year, apportioned 90 per cent liability to Thien and 10 per cent to Aw, with damages to be assessed by the Supreme Court Registrar. Thien, a freelance photographer, is appealing against the judgement.

In her grounds of judgment released last Friday (9 November), and published on Thursday (15 November), SJ Lai said Thien’s “version of events to the police and to this court were attempts to evade criminal and civil liability for the accident.

“They were calculated moves by the second defendant (Thien) who managed thereby to push the entire responsibility for the accident onto the innocent first defendant (Aw)…. the second defendant’s conduct was reprehensible to say the least.”

Motorcyclist braked hard, driver returned to scene

Aw and Shoo were colleagues at a restaurant in Tanglin Shopping Centre. Shoo started working as a waitress around May 2014, and Aw joined her shortly after. Both women lived in Johor Bahru and they would take turns to ride Shoo’s motorcycle or be pillion riders.

On 27 June 2014, at about 10.20am, Aw was riding the motorcycle with Shoo riding pillion along the PIE towards Changi Airport, approaching the Lornie Road exit. Thien’s car, which was in the lane to the motorcycle’s right, abruptly cut into the riders’ path.

Aw was unable to avoid crashing into the car despite braking hard and the impact was so severe that she and Shoo were flung off the motorcycle. Shoo’s helmet fell off and she suffered serious head injuries and lost consciousness.

After 47 days at Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Shoo, who did not regain consciousness, was transferred to a hospital in Johor Bahru.

In November 2016, Shoo’s husband commenced the civil suit, claiming that both Aw and Thien were moving at excessive speed; failed to keep a proper lookout; failed to maintain a safe and/or reasonable distance from each other; and failed to take steps to avoid a crash.

Aw did not take part in the High Court proceedings and could not afford a lawyer. The motorcycle’s insurers did not help her as insurance coverage of the motorcycle did not extend to the pillion rider.

Earlier that year, in March 2016, Aw was charged with causing hurt by doing a negligent act which endangers life or the personal safety of others in relation to the accident. The next month, she pleaded guilty and was fined $2,500.

Asked during the High Court civil trial earlier this year why she had pleaded guilty, Aw said “she was afraid she would have to keep attending court otherwise”.

Aw also pointed out that the Statement of Facts prepared by the prosecution stated that she was riding the motorcycle in lane 1, when she was actually in lane 2 (after slowly shifting from lane 4). Aw, who does not speak English, could not remember if the document was translated to her but had a pro bono lawyer assigned to her.

Meanwhile, Thien’s defence was that he was driving straight in the lane, and that Aw had failed to maintain a safe distance and to keep a proper lookout. He said a car in the first lane ahead of him had stopped suddenly and, as he braked, the motorcycle crashed into the rear of his car.

Thien said he drove to near the Lornie Road exit before calling for the police. Later, he went back to the scene, parking in the first lane, and the police recorded a statement from him.

Judge raps driver

But Judge Lai described the account of the crash that Thien gave the police as “less than honest”. Thien also omitted to mention to police that he had abruptly swerved left into the second lane. “The only reason why he did not mention this fact to the police was because he wanted to push the blame for the accident onto the first defendant.”

In court, Thien was unable to give an estimate of how long he waited for the police, and could not explain why he omitted from his police report that he had swerved left after braking. Thien also could not tell the court where the motorcycle was just before the accident.

Said Judge Lai, “It was obvious to this court that this was due to the fact that the motorcycle was in a blind spot or too close to the car where neither the rear view mirror nor the car’s side mirrors could capture its location.”

The judge said the video footage from Thien’s in-car camera played a significant role in the court’s finding that he was largely responsible for the crash. Based on the footage, the accident took place while the car was travelling at 87 kmh and there was a sudden jerk when the motorcycle hit the car’s rear. The footage also showed that the crash took place on the second lane, where the motorcycle was being ridden.

“The car which was travelling in the first (fast) lane had cut abruptly into the path of the motorcycle when the red car in front braked suddenly. The second defendant similarly braked his car but decided to switch lanes either to overtake the red car or to avoid colliding into it. In so doing, he could not/did not see the motorcycle which just before the collision was almost alongside the car.”

If any liability was to be pinned on the first defendant, it would be very minimal as she reacted too slowly and did not brake quick enough to avoid the collision, the judge added.

Other Singapore stories

Alcoholic who raped 62-year-old woman at knifepoint jailed 18 years with caning

No place for ’empire and aggression’ in Indo-Pacific: US Vice-President Mike Pence

Fibre broadband outage in eastern Singapore resolved after 30 hours