Monday, May 21, 2007
Current affairs article #3
SHE TAKES HER 3 KIDS & MAID TO GO SHOPLIFTING
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/news/story/0,4136,130942,00.html
THIS Singaporean housewife went on a shoplifting spree with her three young children and even the maid in tow.
Using her 14-month-old child's stroller to stash the loot, she tried to make a getaway with about $900 worth of items while shopping at the Giant hypermarket in Jurong.
The items included a variety of slimming products (20 boxes in all), cosmetics, toys and women's clothing. The total value of the items she attempted to steal, with the help of her maid, amounted to $885.50.
At the checkout counter, she just paid for some fruit and meat.
Her ploy was discovered only after a loss prevention officer from Giant, who had been observing her, stopped the group as they walked towards the building's main lobby.
Jacqueline Chua Ai Lin, 32, was convicted of stealing and sentenced to three weeks' jail in March. She has since filed an appeal and is currently out on bail.
During her trial, the court heard that on 19 Jun last year, Chua took her three children and maid to the hypermarket at the IMM building.
She used a trolley, while her Filipino maid, May Gaon Macusi, pushed a baby stroller.
About 3.30pm, Chua, her maid and children stopped at the cosmetics section.
But unknown to her, Mr Nadarajan Rethinam, a loss prevention officer, was watching her.
At that time, Mr Nadarajan had ended his shift and was on his way back to his office when he spotted Chua behaving suspiciously. He had been asked to keep a lookout in the section as the items there were expensive.
Mr Nadarajan saw Chua, who was carrying her youngest child, taking cosmetics from the shelf and handing them to the maid who put them inside a green plastic bag in the stroller.
They then moved to the women's clothes section where they took some clothes and covered the plastic bag.
Chua then went to the fresh food section where she picked up some fruit and meat before proceeding to the cashier with the maid and kids.
While she waited in the queue, she instructed the maid to push the pram containing the unpaid items past the cashier and go into the baby nappy changing room.
After she paid for the few items she was carrying, Chua went into the nappy changing room. They then walked towards the building's main lobby before Mr Nadarajan stopped them.
When confronted, Chua admitted she had not paid for the items. She later apologised and asked for another chance to pay.
But the police were called in and Chua and her maid were arrested.
In defence, Chua claimed she placed items in the stroller even though her trolley was empty because her children had a habit of throwing things out of the trolley.
When she had finished shopping, the family went to the cashier but there was a long queue.
At that time, Chua claimed two of her children needed a diaper change and that was why she instructed the maid to take the children to the diaper changing room.
The maid did so, taking the stroller with all the unpaid items.
Chua claimed she realised that the maid had pushed out the unpaid items only when it was her turn to pay at the cashier.
But she didn't inform the cashier about this oversight, and proceeded to pay for a tote bag, a newspaper and some packet drinks that she had been carrying, she said in her testimony.
She then went to the changing room. But they did not leave immediately as Chua was breastfeeding her youngest daughter.
After that, she claimed, they were walking towards the customer service counter to pay for the items but she was stopped.
District Judge Toh Yung Cheong did not find her a credible witness.
The judge took note of her confession to the police, where she admitted to committing the crime. (See report above.)
The judge said: 'I find that the accused lied... She knew that the value and items involved was extremely large... Therefore, she claimed that she had taken fewer items than reflected in the photographs as it would be hard to explain such a large purchase.'
He also did not buy her excuse that she merely 'forgot' to pay.
The judge said that since there was a long queue at the counter, she should have realised the items were not with her as the queue moved forward.
Furthermore, since it was routine for her to shop with kids in tow and use the stroller to place unpaid items, it made it less likely for her to forget the pram was not with her while she stood in line.
Judge Toh also rejected a claim by Chua that she had been framed. He did not find any reason anyone would want to frame her.
He said: '(Mr Nadarajan) waited patiently for
10 minutes for the accused to come out of the diaper changing room and watched her walk past several cashier's counters... before stopping her.
'In other words, he was giving her numerous opportunities to go to a counter and admit that she had not paid for the items.'
In passing sentence, the judge said: 'I noted that the accused had three young children and on the day of the incident, she claimed that her three children were causing a commotion and that this may have caused her some stress.'
However, he added, unless there was reliable scientific evidence to show that stress could have affected Chua's behaviour, that mitigating factor would not be significant.
She denies confession, gives breastfeeding excuse
AT the trial, Jacqueline Chua Ai Lin sought to use her 'engorged breasts' as the reason why she had not given her statement voluntarily while in custody.
Chua claimed in court that when she narrated her account, it included her assertion that she had no intention to steal.
She also claimed that while she was in detention, she was in pain because of her 'engorged breasts', and when she asked to breastfeed her child, she was told to wait.
A mother who is breastfeeding will have engorged breasts when there is too much milk produced.
Blood flows to the breasts and some of the surrounding tissue swells, causing them to feel tender and painful.
Chua claimed she was in pain when she wrote a second statement.
But police officers denied her allegations.
The officer who recorded Chua's statement also denied the allegation that she was not allowed to breastfeed her baby.
After listening to the accounts, District Judge Toh was inclined to believe that Chua had given her confession voluntarily.
He said: 'The accused confirmed that she was able to give (the officer) exact details of what happened that day.
'Since she was able to do this, I was of the view that the pain, if any, did not sap her will.'
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/news/story/0,4136,130942,00.html
THIS Singaporean housewife went on a shoplifting spree with her three young children and even the maid in tow.
Using her 14-month-old child's stroller to stash the loot, she tried to make a getaway with about $900 worth of items while shopping at the Giant hypermarket in Jurong.
The items included a variety of slimming products (20 boxes in all), cosmetics, toys and women's clothing. The total value of the items she attempted to steal, with the help of her maid, amounted to $885.50.
At the checkout counter, she just paid for some fruit and meat.
Her ploy was discovered only after a loss prevention officer from Giant, who had been observing her, stopped the group as they walked towards the building's main lobby.
Jacqueline Chua Ai Lin, 32, was convicted of stealing and sentenced to three weeks' jail in March. She has since filed an appeal and is currently out on bail.
During her trial, the court heard that on 19 Jun last year, Chua took her three children and maid to the hypermarket at the IMM building.
She used a trolley, while her Filipino maid, May Gaon Macusi, pushed a baby stroller.
About 3.30pm, Chua, her maid and children stopped at the cosmetics section.
But unknown to her, Mr Nadarajan Rethinam, a loss prevention officer, was watching her.
At that time, Mr Nadarajan had ended his shift and was on his way back to his office when he spotted Chua behaving suspiciously. He had been asked to keep a lookout in the section as the items there were expensive.
Mr Nadarajan saw Chua, who was carrying her youngest child, taking cosmetics from the shelf and handing them to the maid who put them inside a green plastic bag in the stroller.
They then moved to the women's clothes section where they took some clothes and covered the plastic bag.
Chua then went to the fresh food section where she picked up some fruit and meat before proceeding to the cashier with the maid and kids.
While she waited in the queue, she instructed the maid to push the pram containing the unpaid items past the cashier and go into the baby nappy changing room.
After she paid for the few items she was carrying, Chua went into the nappy changing room. They then walked towards the building's main lobby before Mr Nadarajan stopped them.
When confronted, Chua admitted she had not paid for the items. She later apologised and asked for another chance to pay.
But the police were called in and Chua and her maid were arrested.
In defence, Chua claimed she placed items in the stroller even though her trolley was empty because her children had a habit of throwing things out of the trolley.
When she had finished shopping, the family went to the cashier but there was a long queue.
At that time, Chua claimed two of her children needed a diaper change and that was why she instructed the maid to take the children to the diaper changing room.
The maid did so, taking the stroller with all the unpaid items.
Chua claimed she realised that the maid had pushed out the unpaid items only when it was her turn to pay at the cashier.
But she didn't inform the cashier about this oversight, and proceeded to pay for a tote bag, a newspaper and some packet drinks that she had been carrying, she said in her testimony.
She then went to the changing room. But they did not leave immediately as Chua was breastfeeding her youngest daughter.
After that, she claimed, they were walking towards the customer service counter to pay for the items but she was stopped.
District Judge Toh Yung Cheong did not find her a credible witness.
The judge took note of her confession to the police, where she admitted to committing the crime. (See report above.)
The judge said: 'I find that the accused lied... She knew that the value and items involved was extremely large... Therefore, she claimed that she had taken fewer items than reflected in the photographs as it would be hard to explain such a large purchase.'
He also did not buy her excuse that she merely 'forgot' to pay.
The judge said that since there was a long queue at the counter, she should have realised the items were not with her as the queue moved forward.
Furthermore, since it was routine for her to shop with kids in tow and use the stroller to place unpaid items, it made it less likely for her to forget the pram was not with her while she stood in line.
Judge Toh also rejected a claim by Chua that she had been framed. He did not find any reason anyone would want to frame her.
He said: '(Mr Nadarajan) waited patiently for
10 minutes for the accused to come out of the diaper changing room and watched her walk past several cashier's counters... before stopping her.
'In other words, he was giving her numerous opportunities to go to a counter and admit that she had not paid for the items.'
In passing sentence, the judge said: 'I noted that the accused had three young children and on the day of the incident, she claimed that her three children were causing a commotion and that this may have caused her some stress.'
However, he added, unless there was reliable scientific evidence to show that stress could have affected Chua's behaviour, that mitigating factor would not be significant.
She denies confession, gives breastfeeding excuse
AT the trial, Jacqueline Chua Ai Lin sought to use her 'engorged breasts' as the reason why she had not given her statement voluntarily while in custody.
Chua claimed in court that when she narrated her account, it included her assertion that she had no intention to steal.
She also claimed that while she was in detention, she was in pain because of her 'engorged breasts', and when she asked to breastfeed her child, she was told to wait.
A mother who is breastfeeding will have engorged breasts when there is too much milk produced.
Blood flows to the breasts and some of the surrounding tissue swells, causing them to feel tender and painful.
Chua claimed she was in pain when she wrote a second statement.
But police officers denied her allegations.
The officer who recorded Chua's statement also denied the allegation that she was not allowed to breastfeed her baby.
After listening to the accounts, District Judge Toh was inclined to believe that Chua had given her confession voluntarily.
He said: 'The accused confirmed that she was able to give (the officer) exact details of what happened that day.
'Since she was able to do this, I was of the view that the pain, if any, did not sap her will.'
# posted by Kris @ 4:46 AM 
