A 52-year-old woman, Tan Wee Teng, recently found herself in court facing a series of charges, including accusations of hitting a bus driver. These charges, which accumulated from incidents occurring between August 2023 and August 2024, included two counts of public nuisance for actions such as placing her feet on bus poles and causing disruptions to service.
Additionally, she faced two counts of criminal force and one count of harassment.
Ms. Tan had received a 12-month conditional warning from the authorities for four of these offences. However, a fifth charge, specifically for allegedly hitting the arm of bus driver Ding Shuai on August 23, 2024, brought her before the court.
During the proceedings, the prosecution indicated their intention to apply for a discharge not amounting to acquittal for all five charges. This would have come with a new condition: a three-year conditional warning, meaning the charges would be dropped for now but could be brought back if Ms. Tan committed any further offences within that period.
However, Ms. Tan strongly objected to this proposal. She argued that she was “set up” by the bus driver. According to her, the bus driver had initiated physical contact first, which she claimed was an attempt to provoke a reaction from her. Ms. Tan was adamant about her desire to proceed with a full trial, believing it was necessary to prove her innocence. She specifically stated that the complainant, the bus driver, was a “confessed perjurer.”
During the court hearing, a video showed the bus driver reaching out towards Ms. Tan, followed by Ms. Tan’s reaction.
@bbidaaaa aiya auntie pls be considerate lah 😭😡 #sgbus #kakibusuk ♬ Backsound Lucu – Faid rafanda
While Ms. Tan acknowledged having lightly touched the driver, she firmly maintained that she was provoked into acting. The court also heard about her past behaviour regarding bus fares; she reportedly had a history of trying to tap her bag on the card reader and then, if noticed, immediately asking to alight from the bus without paying.
Despite her firm protests and claims of being innocent and having been “set up,” the judge ultimately granted the prosecution’s request for a discharge not amounting to acquittal. This means that although the charges are not fully cleared, they could indeed be reactivated if Ms. Tan were to commit any new offences within the 36-month conditional warning period.
Ms. Tan, still expressing her strong wish for a trial, continued to question the evidence presented against her during the proceedings. Ms. Tan could have faced, such as fines, jail time, or both.
