SHE woke up with a start after sensing that someone was touching her private parts.

She opened her eyes and, though mildly shortsighted, the 26-year-old Malaysian woman could make out that the man leaving the room was her Singaporean landlord.

Distressed and upset at being molested, Jane wasn't sure what to do.

It was 3am. What if her molester was still lurking outside? Should she call the police or her family in Johor Baru?

How would her landlady, who was then pregnant, and the couple's 7-year-old daughter be affected if the police came to the flat in the middle of the night?

She did not want to alarm her family members at that hour, so Jane decided to seek help from her best friend Alice, who was working thousands of kilometres away.

She sent an SMS message to Alice to call her from Ireland as it was cheaper.

Her long-distance SOS call helped Jane cope with the trauma and bring her molester to justice.

The testimonies of Jane and Alice, who came here as a witness, were so convincing that the District Court convicted the landlord, Neo Say Hong, 33, and sentenced him to 10 months' jail and three strokes of the cane on 25 Feb.

The women's real names were withheld by the court.

Jane was doing a three-year part-time diploma course here at the time of the incident.

When she sent her distress message out that night, Alice had advised her to call the police and, if possible, to move out of the flat.

Later that day, Alice called again and talked to her until Jane left for an examination in the afternoon.

After her exam, Jane left Singapore for her Johor Bahru home and told her mother and sister what had happened.

The next day, Jane and her sister made a police report at the Queenstown Neighbourhood Police Centre.

Relating her ordeal during the trial, Jane, who had been in Singapore since 1999, said that on 25 Nov 2005, she had returned to the four-room Housing Board flat in western Singapore at about 7pm after work.

Her landlord came home about midnight.

She continued studying for her exam in her rented room till 1am, then went to bed. Later that night, Jane woke up after feeling someone rubbing her private parts over her panties.

She opened her eyes, and light from the lamp-posts streaming into her window enabled her to see a man's head, as he was squatting at the side of her bed.

He continued touching her for another three seconds.

Spooked, she made a sudden movement of her legs.

Jane told the court: 'When I realised I was being touched, I was very shocked and my instinctive reaction was to move my body.'

It was enough to make him stop and move towards the door.

CLAD IN SHORTS

She said the man's upper body was naked, and he was wearing a pair of knee-length shorts.

She also saw three-quarters of his face.

As light streamed in from the living room when he opened the door, she recognised the man as her landlord.

Jane was paralysed with fear and was unable to shout. She lay on her bed and cried, while looking at the door to make sure no one entered.

Several minutes later, a shadow appeared on the floor near the door.

As the door was pushed open, she moved her hands and legs, hoping that he would think that she had woken up.

It worked, and he retreated.

Jane said: 'If I ran out of my room, I might meet him outside, and I would not know what to do.'

So she continued looking at the door, waiting for daylight.

'It was my way of protecting myself and preventing the intruder from coming into my room again.'

A few minutes later, she checked the time on her handphone and decided to contact Alice.

Alice later testified: 'When I called her, she spoke to me in a trembling voice, and she sounded afraid. She was speaking in soft tones, almost in whispers, and she was also crying.'

In the middle of their 10-minute conversation, Jane needed to use the toilet and she went while still on the line with her friend.

Jane said: 'It gave me a sense of security, (and) made me feel as if someone was with me then. It enabled me to summon up the courage to step out of the room to use the toilet.'

But when she reached the kitchen toilet, she noticed that the light was switched on. When she could not open the door, she realised that someone was inside.

Afraid that she would run into her landlord, she ran back to her room, and Alice reminded her to lock her door.

She kept her eyes on the door as she talked to Alice, but her friend had to hang up after a few more minutes because it was time for her to go to work in Ireland.

At 5am, Jane heard someone trying to open her door. She panicked and stared at the door. Moments later, the person stopped and Jane heard footsteps going to the master bedroom next to her room.

As she waited for daylight, Jane decided to move out later in the daytime.

At 10am Singapore time, Alice called Jane again to see how she was doing.

The second conversation lasted almost two hours. Jane was still emotionally unstable and cried while talking to Alice.

Neo's defence had said that Jane's behaviour was incongruous with how a genuine victim of molest would behave, because she did not immediately shout for help when she realised she was being molested.

She also did not immediately call for the police or contact her family, but instead called a friend who was in Ireland.

But District Judge Wong Choon Ning said that Jane's explanations as to why she did not immediately make a police report or call her family were credible and reasonable.

She also felt that Jane's explanation for calling Alice was also credible.

She said: 'Alice was Jane's good friend whom she had known for more than 10years. Jane would usually tell Alice everything about herself.

'Further, Alice was then working in Ireland, and while it was past 3am in Singapore, it would only be in the evening in Ireland. Jane did not wish to call her other friends in Singapore as it was already past 3am and she felt that being molested was a shameful thing and she was not comfortable sharing such a private matter with these other friends.'

This article was first published in The New Paper on Apr 12, 2008.

Is this article useful to you?