Jail for woman who spread intimate images, videos of boyfriend's ex-girlfriend after finding them on his phone

CNA

19-06-2025

SINGAPORE: Upset that her boyfriend had intimate pictures and recordings of his ex-girlfriend, a woman decided to distribute the compromising material while impersonating the ex-girlfriend.
Li Shengnan pretended to be the ex-girlfriend on Instagram, Telegram and the dating app Pure. She then messaged people who knew the victim, in addition to random men.
Li, 38, was jailed for 17 months on Thursday (Jun 19) after pleading guilty to one count of distributing intimate images or recordings. Two charges of unauthorised access to and modification of computer material were taken into consideration for sentencing.
The identities of the victim and Li's now ex-boyfriend are protected by a gag order.
HOW LI FOUND THE MATERIAL
Li was then a broker in the reinsurance industry.
She was staying at her then boyfriend's residence in 2022 when she picked up his phone.
While he was in the shower, Li looked through his phone's photo gallery without his permission. She then saw the intimate videos and images of his ex-girlfriend.
This ex-girlfriend had been in a relationship with the man from around 2020 to 2021.
Recognising the victim as someone her boyfriend used to date, Li became upset at the content. She did not know the victim personally.
Li then transferred the intimate images and videos to her own phone before deleting them from her boyfriend's phone.
She did not tell him about what she had done.
PRETENDED TO BE VICTIM
Later, Li impersonated the victim on Instagram, Telegram and Pure.
She created four accounts on Instagram, and also changed her name on Telegram to the victim's name, and inserted the victim's actual Instagram account name in the details of her Telegram account.
Li then went through the victim's actual Instagram account and picked out several of her followers. Using her fake accounts, Li distributed the compromising material to these followers via direct messages.
On Telegram, Li used the "people nearby" function to find random users. She contacted at least two such users over Telegram and distributed videos and images of the victim to them.
Li also impersonated the victim on Pure and contacted multiple unknown males. She conversed with them while claiming to be the victim, and gave them the victim's mobile phone number.
She asked them to contact her on WhatsApp instead.
Li distributed an intimate image of the victim to one of these men.
Between Nov 22, 2022 and Nov 29, 2022, Li distributed at least four videos, ranging from 5 seconds to 57 seconds in length, and at least three images, across seven occasions.
The victim was undressed and engaged in sexual acts in these videos and images, and she was identifiable.
The victim found out about the distribution from individuals who received her images and videos.
She received messages from at least two people on WhatsApp. These individuals informed her that they had been conversing with someone purporting to be her on Pure.
She lodged a police report on Nov 27, 2022.
Investigators identified Li by tracing the IP addresses used to log into the false Instagram accounts.
SENTENCING
During sentencing, the prosecution and the defence argued at length over Li's psychiatric reports, disagreeing about how much weight should be attributed to them.
The prosecution said that no weight ought to be given to the reports, which indicated that Li had symptoms of mixed anxiety and depressive disorder, which evolved into persistent depressive disorder between August 2022 and October 2024.
Reports also indicated that Li married in March 2024 and gave birth to a son in September that year.
The prosecution argued that the defence had failed to prove that Li had suffered from a psychiatric condition that materially contributed to her offending.
It added that it offered to convene a hearing for the psychiatrist to give evidence and defend his expert opinion on Li's condition, but the defence had rejected this offer.
Li was represented by lawyer Gino Hardial Singh.
Mr Singh contended that his client was suffering from depressive disorder prior to the commission of the offences, and this was diagnosed in as early as August 2022.
Principal District Judge Toh Han Li declined to accord mitigatory weight based on the psychiatric reports, noting contradictions between a finding which stated that Li's rational judgement was impaired and subsequent statements that Li was aware of what she was doing.
Pointing to the significant amount of planning and premeditation in the lead-up to the offences, such as the steps Li took to transfer the material to her own phone and then impersonate the victim, Judge Toh said that the offence was not committed on the spur of the moment. He also noted that the offence persisted over seven days.