The prosecution asked for a jail sentence of 17 to 18 months, while the defense asked for a lower sentence of 14 and a half months.
Delivering transient remarks on his decision on Monday, District Judge James Elisha Lee outlined the general need to discourage such international crimes to guard Singapore’s fame as a financial center.
He also noted the upper amount of Su’s charges – in comparison with those already convicted – and other aggravating aspects comparable to premeditation and the variety of banks that were victims of Su’s crimes.
However, he also took under consideration Su’s guilty plea and his agreement to the state forfeiting 95.5% of his assets.
Su’s jail sentence was delayed by almost 10 months as he has been in custody since August 2023.
The remaining nine involved on this case were sentenced to 12 to 16 months in prison.
In a media statement issued after Su’s hearing, chief prosecutor Tan Kiat Pheng said the amounts involved within the 10 cases “make this one in all the most important money laundering cases handled by Singapore.”
“The speedy prosecution of those 10 cases sends a powerful message to would-be criminals that Singapore is not going to tolerate attempts to flout our laws,” he added.
The court previously heard that the Singapore Police Service’s Commercial Affairs Department had received information since 2021 about possible money laundering and the usage of forged documents to hide the sources of funds flowing into Singapore bank accounts.
Su had assets price about A$187 million – including money, cryptocurrency, real estate and other luxury items – confiscated or banned from sale.
These include assets he funded but were held under his wife’s name.
In August 2019, he moved his children to Singapore because he wanted them to check here. He then followed suit the next 12 months.
On August 15 last 12 months, police raided Su’s home and confiscated A$550,903 from a protected in his main bedroom, including money he made by providing illegal gambling services.
Earlier on March 5, 2021, Su’s relationship manager at Maybank received an email from the Financial Crimes Unit indicating two suspicious deposits into Su’s account within the amounts of S$1,029,970 and S$969,970.
When the manager asked Su to clarify the source of the funds, he said they got here from the alleged sale of a property in Burj Khalifa in Dubai and showed a sales contract, which turned out to be forged.
On Monday, U.S. District Judge Lee said the paramount importance of considering general deterrence in Su’s sentencing “can’t be overemphasized.”
He added that the court stressed the “compelling need” to guard Singapore’s fame as a serious financial center from the antagonistic impact of international crimes.
The defendant’s crime… demonstrates a high degree of disregard for the law
In relation to the offense of benefiting from criminal activity, the judge considered the transnational element of the offense, its significant amounts and the persistence of the offense as aggravating aspects.
In addition to the A$550,903 charge brought by the prosecutor’s office, three similar charges were considered. Two of the costs involved amounts of A$5 million each and the third involved amounts of A$7 million.
“This demonstrates the scale and significance of the offense committed by the defendant and demonstrates a high degree of disregard for the law on the defendant’s part,” Lee said.
In the case of defrauding Maybank in regards to the source of funds using a forged document, the judge found that Su’s crimes violated the integrity of Singapore’s economic system.
The use of forgery indicated premeditation.
The judge also noted that the offenses – including the costs in query – occurred over a period of roughly 2.5 years, from November 2020 to May 2023.
Court documents show that these allegations also included defrauding other banks.
“In my opinion, this proves the defendant’s persistence in committing the crime and disrespect for the law,” the judge said.
Lee also agreed with the prosecution’s argument that the undeniable fact that Su defrauded a couple of bank also aggravated his crimes.
For possession of cash constituting the proceeds of crime, Su might have been fined as much as A$500,000 or jailed for as much as 10 years, or each.
For fraudulently using a forged document and passing it off as authentic, he faced a jail sentence of as much as 4 years, a high-quality, or each.
