A 58-year-old man in Singapore has been sentenced to five weeks' imprisonment after driving his vehicle into the iconic Fountain of Wealth at Suntec City while under the influence of alcohol. The incident, which occurred on July 13, 2024, saw the vehicle crash through protective barricades surrounding the fountain and plunge into its basement, causing approximately S$64,600 in damage. The District Judge also imposed a driving disqualification of two and a half years from the date of his release, reflecting the severity of the offence in the eyes of the court.
The chain of events began in the early evening of July 12 when Then Shing Chong, the driver, left his residence and travelled to the shopping mall to socialise with a friend. He arrived at the venue around 6pm, parked his vehicle in the basement carpark, and proceeded to a bar where he spent the next six hours consuming approximately one litre of beer between 6.15pm and midnight. Before heading to the bar, he had also ingested either an antihistamine or a sleeping pill, compounding the impairment caused by the alcohol consumption. This combination of substances significantly affected his cognitive and motor functions during the drive that followed.
The dangerous sequence of driving mishaps became apparent as Then attempted to exit the carpark. While the vehicle remained stationary for approximately ten seconds as the gantry barrier lifted to allow passage, he subsequently drove onto Temasek Boulevard. However, rather than following the directional signage that clearly indicated a required left turn into a roundabout, he continued travelling in a straight trajectory. His vehicle veered across three lanes of traffic before smashing through the protective barriers around the Fountain of Wealth. The car subsequently plunged into the basement of the fountain structure, where the crash ultimately came to rest.
A particularly concerning aspect of the incident was the presence of three construction workers at the fountain's basement at the time of the accident. Fortunately, all three managed to escape from the immediate impact area without sustaining injuries, narrowly avoiding what could have been a catastrophic outcome. The Deputy Public Prosecutor emphasised during proceedings that had the workers been positioned directly beneath the vehicle's trajectory, the consequences would have been far more devastating. This near-miss with serious injury or loss of life underscored the reckless nature of the offence and the element of chance that prevented tragedy.
Following the crash, emergency services attended the scene and Then was transported to Tan Tock Seng Hospital's emergency department where he was treated for injuries including a lacerated scalp. Notably, blood and breath alcohol tests were not conducted immediately after the accident, as he was prioritised for urgent medical treatment. However, his statement to the Institute of Mental Health regarding his consumption of medication prior to drinking provided evidence of his decision-making impairment at the time. A heavy crane lorry was deployed to extract his vehicle from the fountain basin before it was towed away for assessment and disposal.
During court proceedings, the prosecution, represented by Deputy Public Prosecutor Gladys Lim, made a compelling case for custodial punishment. The prosecutor highlighted the serious nature of drink-driving as an offence, the substantial property damage inflicted upon public infrastructure, and the grave risk posed to human life. She urged the District Judge to impose a prison sentence as the appropriate form of punishment, emphasising the need for both specific deterrence against the offender and general deterrence to discourage similar behaviour in the community.
The defence team, comprising lawyers from Invictus Law Corporation, pursued an alternative sentencing pathway by requesting that the court order a pre-sentence report to assess Then's suitability for a Mandatory Treatment Order (MTO). Under this mechanism, offenders with underlying psychiatric conditions can receive therapeutic intervention tailored to address their mental health issues rather than serving traditional custodial sentences. The defence presented an Institute of Mental Health report confirming that Then had been suffering from major depressive disorder at the time of the incident, arguing that his psychiatric condition had contributed causally to the offence. The lawyers contended that treatment-focused sentencing would be more appropriate than imprisonment.
However, the prosecution objected to the application for an MTO assessment, insisting that the circumstances demanded a deterrent approach. The prosecutor argued that the seriousness of the offence, combined with its potential for causing death or severe injury, necessitated the sending of a clear message that such behaviour would not be tolerated. The balance between mental health considerations and public safety became the central tension in the sentencing deliberations.
Ultimately, District Judge Koo Zhi Xuan sided with the prosecution's position, declining to order an MTO assessment and proceeding to sentence Then to five weeks' imprisonment. The judge underscored that drink-driving constitutes highly irresponsible behaviour, particularly in an urban setting where pedestrians and other road users face constant risk. The court acknowledged the substantial property damage caused to public infrastructure and the potentially catastrophic consequences that could have resulted had the workers been positioned differently. The driving disqualification for two and a half years was imposed to prevent future incidents of this nature.
Then had made full restitution for the damage caused to Suntec City's Fountain of Wealth, demonstrating financial responsibility for the consequences of his actions even as the court pursued criminal liability. The case serves as a stark reminder of the dangers associated with consuming alcohol before driving, particularly when combined with medication use. For Malaysian readers, the incident echoes similar traffic enforcement challenges across Southeast Asia, where drink-driving remains a persistent public safety issue despite increasing awareness campaigns and penalties.
The sentencing reflects Singapore's increasingly stringent approach to traffic offences that endanger public safety. The incident also highlights the ongoing tension within criminal justice systems between rehabilitation and deterrence when mental health factors are involved. While sympathetic to Then's reported depressive disorder, the court determined that the protection of the public from dangerous behaviour must take precedence, setting a precedent that psychiatric conditions alone may not shield offenders from custodial punishment when the conduct poses grave risks to others.
