Rosli's murder charge was subsequently reduced to manslaughter, and after pleading guilty to the reduced charge and several other unrelated charges for cheating, Rosli was sentenced to 12 years of preventive detention on account of his long criminal record (since 1991), and subsequently, through the prosecution's appeal, Rosli's sentence of preventive detention was raised to the maximum of 20 years for the same reason, as well as due to his high risk of re-offending and his original sentence was manifestly inadequate.
[4] A team of police investigators, led by Inspector Kelvin Kwok, arrived at the scene to check the corpse, but the identity of the body was unknown.
Dr Paul Chui, a forensic pathologist, inspected the body and told the police that the deceased was a female, most likely aged between 25 and 45,[5] and the probable cause of death was a severe injury he found on the skull, and it was inflicted with blunt force trauma, and he believed that based on the extremely high degree of decomposition, the woman had died for about four days.
At the scene, the police also discovered tyre marks located narrowly between each other and broken glass, which suggested a small vehicle likely belonged to the killer or victim, and there were signs that the body might have been brought here for disposal.
[6] The belongings of the deceased discovered were photographed and published on the press to seek any leads to ascertain her identity,[7] which remained unidentified for the next few days.
The deceased, according to Dr Boey's record, was 47-year-old Choo Xue Ying, a Singaporean citizen and property agent working under Propnex.
Lu, who was saddened and shocked to hear about Choo's death, told them he last saw her about a week before the police arrived at his flat but he thought she was going on a business trip like she sometimes would.
[6][19] On 31 October 2008, after receiving intel that Ali and Jelly were hiding in Sentosa, the police arrested the couple at a hotel room.
[6][19] In October 2010, 50-year-old Rosli bin Yassin stood trial at the High Court for one count of murdering Choo Xue Ying back in 2008.
Jelly, Rosli's accomplice, was called to give evidence as the prosecution's key witness,[29][30] and she testified about her knowledge that Rosli had killed Choo Xue Ying per his admission to her,[31][32] although the defence tried to raise doubts over her reliability as a witness and pointed out how she lied on several occasions to the police, and accused her of being part of the murder when Choo was assaulted to death.
Rosli reportedly did not feel happy about escaping the gallows and proclaimed he rather be hanged than spending a long period behind bars.
He argued that based on his long criminal record his latest spate of offences, which not only involved cheating but also resulted in the unlawful death of an innocent woman, Rosli was "a menace to society" and he also had a high risk of re-offending and exhibited no remorse for his actions, and thus Rosli should be given the maximum sentence of preventive detention for the protection of society for the longest period permitted under the law.
They also cited that Rosli did not have violent antecedents and his criminal record consisted of property offences, and the maximum preventive detention sentence was only reserved for recalcitrant offenders with violent antecedents, claimed trial, or possessed a very long criminal history, and Rosli was not one of those fitting the criteria, and hence, his preventive detention order should be less than 20 years.
[19][41] Justice Woo referred to precedent cases of preventive detention sentences, and he decided that the maximum period of 20 years' preventive detention was manifestly excessive due to Rosli not having prior history of violent offences like those precedent cases, and some other extenuating circumstances in favour of Rosli.
In their full grounds of decision in March 2013, the Court of Appeal accepted the prosecution's arguments that Rosli was a menace to society and his original sentence of 12 years was manifestly inadequate.
They conceded that while Rosli's killing of Choo was his first violent offence and it was uncharacteristic of him, but they stated that it was extremely worrying that Rosli's non-violent criminal conduct had escalated into the taking of a human life, which the judges described as "one of the most egregious and blameworthy crimes on the books", and felt that it was irrelevant to determine whether it was uncharacteristic or not for him to do so.
They also found that Rosli "lacked remorse and was incorrigible", since he had used Choo's cheques to commit more cheating offences before he was caught, and also based on his psychiatric report.
Given that Rosli himself had no marketable skills and was of advanced age, there was a low chance he would be gainfully employed after his release and he might return to a life of crime as the only means to support himself financially.