Warning: This report contains distressing details of child abuse.SINGAPORE: A man who repeatedly abused a toddler under a year old in horrific ways, because of his grudge against the child's father, was sentenced to 14 years' jail on Wednesday (May 20).Over the span of three months, the 32-year-old man pushed his nephew-in-law's head into a pail of water, pressed a pillow onto his face and choked him repeatedly until he foamed at the mouth. The abuse ended only after a woman observed him choking the child at the void deck of a public housing block. She confronted him before calling the police.Investigations uncovered multiple videos of the man abusing the child, aged nine to 11 months, during the assault. The offender admitted to abusing the boy because he held a grudge against his brother-in-law, who is the child's father.All parties in this case cannot be named due to gag orders protecting the victim.When the case was last heard in April, the prosecution had sought 12 to 15 years' jail for the Singaporean man, while the defence had asked for eight to 10 years' jail instead.In meting out the sentence, District Judge Koo Zhi Xuan described the man's behaviour as heinous acts that were a "grave affront to human dignity". It was deeply distressing to read about the abuse, and the heavy sentence reflects the retribution and general deterrence needed in this case, he said. The man inflicted severe and lasting harm on the victim, trampling on a moral obligation not to commit harm against an infant who could not speak or defend himself, the judge added. Noting that the acts were committed while the boy was under his care, the judge said that the man also betrayed the trust placed in him by his wife's family. The way the man planned all his abusive acts – engineering occasions to be alone with the child and taking advantage of those instances – was an aggravating factor. Unlike some cases of abuse, his actions were not committed in the heat of the moment or borne out of caregiver stress, Judge Koo noted. The offender sometimes abused the boy in public at a void deck, which enhances his culpability, the judge said, noting that his actions have shaken the public's collective sense of safety and tranquillity. Instead of applying the usual 30 per cent reduction for pleading guilty in the first instance, the judge said that the case was so grave and egregious that it would not be in public interest to do so. Instead, he applied a 20 per cent reduction, noting that the accused had even recorded all of his abusive acts in 34 videos, so that he could rewatch them. This behaviour is "highly dehumanising and sickening", worthy of the strongest condemnation, Judge Koo said.The man, represented by Mr Amarick Gill from his eponymous law firm, asked to defer his sentence until end-July. He is still employed, and plans to quit his job at the end of May to serve a one-month notice period, his lawyer said, requesting more time for the man to settle his personal affairs. Deputy Public Prosecutor James Chew noted that the court had already given the man time to settle his personal affairs after he pleaded guilty in April. At an earlier hearing, the prosecution said medical reports found it likely that the abuse had already contributed to the developmental delay in the victim in the form of moderate to severe expressive speech delay and a developmental age of 12 months, although he was 21 months old at the time of assessment. On Wednesday, the prosecution said a speech therapist recommended that the victim undergo individual speech and language therapy sessions twice a week for one year, with an expected total cost of S$24,960.Apart from the sentence, the judge ordered the man to pay the victim's family S$4,000 in compensation, noting that he definitely did not have the means to pay anything close to the full medical expenses. The long-term impact on the child's neurodevelopment was one of the most serious aggravating factors in this case, the judge said on Wednesday. After delivering his sentence, Judge Koo asked the victim's parents to come forward to speak to them personally, from one parent to another. "The severe sentence I've imposed reflects how gravely and unjustly your son has been harmed. No child should suffer what your son suffered, and no parent should have to go through what you're going through now," he said. "What happened to him is appalling, but it does not diminish his inherent worth. That remains intact and always will." Adding that he hopes the sentence will bring some closure to the boy's parents, the judge reminded them that it would not be in their son's interest if they took matters into their own hands. "Having suffered so much at such a young age, I think your son deserves even greater love and protection. It is my sincere hope that he may one day fully recover from this episode." Noting that the parents had said that the case had placed an enormous strain on the family and created tensions between them, the judge urged the husband and wife to find the strength to work together to help their son heal. "Your son is truly precious and worthy of your love." While the case was on recess, some of the offender's other relatives approached the victim's father, and both sides started shouting, moving closer to each other. Security personnel had to separate them.After the judge finished speaking to them, the victim's parents were ushered out of the court, and he reminded the accused and other family members that there should be no contact between them and the victim and his parents. THE CASEThe offender worked as a paramedic with a private ambulance service at the time of the offences. He lived in a five-room flat with his wife, his mother-in-law and a domestic worker. The victim is the firstborn child of the offender's brother-in-law.Around mid-2024, the man's mother-in-law, who is also the victim's grandmother, asked that the victim be taken to the flat, because she wanted to play with the child.The boy stayed over for a few days each time he was there, and the grandmother and domestic worker would look after him. The offender helped out as well when he was home.The boy stayed at their flat for the first time in mid-July 2024. The offender abused him on two of the five days the boy stayed over.On one occasion, he offered to shower the boy and placed him in a pail filled with water, before he forcefully pushed his head face-down.The boy gasped for air when the offender released his head. These acts were captured on the offender's mobile phone.Later, after the nine-month-old boy was dressed and lying face-up on the bed, the offender struck his face and body multiple times with a bolster.He took a pillow and pressed it down on the boy face while the child struggled and cried. The man continued hitting him with a bolster and forcefully twisted the boy's wrist.He filmed all of the abusive acts.Around mid-August 2024, the victim's grandmother called the victim's father and said she missed the child. At this time, the victim's mother was heavily pregnant with her second child.The victim's father took the boy to stay with the offender for five days. He noticed that his son cried and did not want to stay there.The offender abused the boy several times over this period, including holding him upside down by his leg and choking the boy while holding him in the air by his neck.On another occasion, he inserted a clothes hanger into the back of the victim's shirt and lifted it up, holding the boy in the air.He walked around with the boy hanging from the hanger before dropping the toddler from a height onto a mattress on the ground.On Aug 15, 2024, the man took the boy into his bedroom and closed the door before abusing him. He choked the boy three times and the boy started foaming at the mouth in the midst of the assaults.He recorded all his acts.Court documents contained multiple other descriptions of the man's abuse against the boy, including smothering the boy, twisting his arm and punching his face.PASSER-BY SPOTS ABUSEOn Sep 15, 2024, the victim's grandmother suggested taking the victim home with her, since the victim's mother had just given birth and the victim was unwell.The next day, the offender suggested taking the boy downstairs for a walk.He placed the boy on a metal table at the void deck and began filming himself abusing the child, who was by then 11 months old.Around this time, a woman passed by with her husband and her son. She noticed the offender and the child and observed the offender's actions for a while before calling the police.The offender was arrested at the flat later that same day.The child was taken to the hospital for medical checks and his parents were very shocked. They did not know why the offender would abuse the victim.Investigations found multiple videos capturing the abuse on the offender's phone.He admitted to abusing the boy because of a "personal grudge" against the child's father. He also admitted that he had transferred the videos to his tablet device and would watch them whenever he was reminded of his grudge and felt angry towards the victim's father.Details of the grudge were not revealed in open court, with the man's lawyer saying in his mitigation plea that he would not elaborate further on "the broken relationship" between the offender and his brother-in-law, as "it would serve no purpose".MITIGATIONLast month, Mr Chew from the prosecution called this an "appalling and egregious case of child abuse by the accused against his infant nephew-in-law".The man had engineered opportunities to be alone with the victim and even filmed the abuse for future consumption, Mr Chew said, calling this "calculated" and "sadistic".In his mitigation plea, his lawyers said that their client committed the offences because of a "visceral hatred" for the victim's father.However, the offender conceded that regardless of any reasons, there was no justification for his actions.In his police statements, he said he was extremely remorseful and sincerely apologised to the victim and his family."I'm deeply ashamed of the acts that I had done. I truly never intend to cause any harm to my nephew," the offender said. "I'm prepared and ready to face the consequences of my actions. I promise something like this would not happen again."The man was immensely grateful that the victim did not sustain any significant injury, Mr Gill said. He had been diagnosed with "mixed depressive and anxiety disorder" and placed on medication, but no causal or contributory link to the offences was found, his lawyer added.The man had "readily obliged" the victim's parents' requests for domestic workers, bearing all costs for four maids between November 2024 and December 2025, Mr Gill noted.He also voluntarily paid for the victim's medical expenses and gave monthly sums of money to the victim's family.In a letter he wrote to the court, the man said there was no excuse for his behaviour. "I cannot undo what has happened, but I carry this regret with me always," he wrote."I recognise that I need to change, and I am committed to doing so.”Given the long sentence, the judge allowed the man to defer his sentence until the end of July, while increasing the bail amount.