The Court of Appeal has doubled a woman’s prison sentence from six years and six months to 12 years after finding that the original punishment was too lenient for the fatal stabbing of her boyfriend in a hotel room.
A three-member panel comprising Justices Zaini Mazlan, Wong Kian Kheong and Evrol Mariette Peters unanimously allowed the prosecution’s appeal against the sentence handed down by the Johor Bahru High Court.
Peters, who delivered the court’s broad grounds of judgment, said the High Court had been “over-sympathetic” towards the woman by placing too much emphasis on her age while failing to give sufficient weight to the seriousness of the killing.
The woman, identified only as Shy to protect her identity, was 19 when the incident occurred on September 20, 2022. She and her 29-year-old boyfriend, who had been in a relationship with her for almost a year, had checked into a hotel near Jalan Austin Heights.
Court documents showed that an argument erupted after the man demanded sex. Shy refused, telling him she was menstruating. He then allegedly threatened her with a knife, leading to a struggle between the pair over the weapon.
During the struggle, Shy stabbed him multiple times in the chest. An autopsy later found 28 injuries, with multiple stab wounds to the chest determined to be the cause of death.
Shy surrendered herself to police and was initially charged with murder under Section 302 of the Penal Code. Following representations by her lawyer, the prosecution agreed to reduce the charge to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304(a).
She subsequently pleaded guilty to the amended charge and was sentenced by the High Court to six years and six months in prison.
However, the Court of Appeal ruled that the sentence failed to reflect the gravity of the offence. The court noted that Section 304(a) carries a maximum sentence of 30 years, after Parliament increased the limit from 20 years in 2007.
Peters also said the High Court had erred in treating Shy’s loss of youthful offender status as a mitigating factor. She was 22 when convicted and therefore no longer fell within the statutory definition of a youthful offender.
The appellate court rejected the suggestion that the circumstances of the struggle substantially reduced the seriousness of the offence.
“This was not a single impulsive stab. The multiple injuries demonstrate a sustained violent attack,” Peters said.
The court nevertheless took into account Shy’s age at the time of the incident, her guilty plea, remorse, lack of previous convictions and psychiatric condition as mitigating factors.
However, these considerations had to be weighed against the 28 injuries inflicted, the use of a knife, the targeting of the chest and the death of the 29-year-old man.
Peters also referred to Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice when explaining the need for a proportionate sentence.
“She is young, remorseful and traumatised, and for that, she deserves leniency. But she owes a debt, not to Shylock, but to the memory of the deceased and his grieving family,” she said.
The Court of Appeal ruled that 12 years’ imprisonment was proportionate and necessary in the public interest. The sentence was ordered to run from the date of Shy’s arrest.
Deputy public prosecutor Noor Farhana Adham appeared for the prosecution, while K S Pang represented Shy.
