As a result of the scolding, Purwanti increasingly grew angry and hatched a plan to kill Har while she was doing her daily chores in the house.

Right at the last moment however, Purwanti did not use the knife but used her bare hands to strangle Har, pinning her down and covering her eyes while the 57-year-old woman struggled for her life.

[1][9][10] Although the case was initially investigated as a possible suicide, it was subsequently reclassified as murder when Purwanti was arrested as a suspect, after the police observed that her nails were neatly cut and became suspicious of her conduct while they were at the house.

The lesser offence did not carry a death sentence, but if convicted, Purwanti could either be jailed for life, or up to ten years behind bars.

[13][14][15][16] After the completion of the guilty plea and presenting the full statement of facts, the prosecution sought the maximum sentence of life imprisonment, on the grounds that the killing was "deliberate and calculated".

Hence, Anandan urged the court to temper justice with mercy and be lenient with Purwanti on behalf of her young age, her lack of criminal records and the abuse she suffered from Har before the crime.

However, he noted that Purwanti was "no shrinking violet unable to fend for herself", and had coldly formulated a calculative scheme to cover up her crime and pass off the death of Har as suicide, which demonstrated her wickedness and unstable character in spite of her young age.

Therefore, Judicial Commissioner Rajah felt that as a unequivocal signal to any potential offenders among maids who wanted to retaliate against their violent and abusive employers through crime rather than seeking help from authorities, the sentence should be manifestly adequate in view of these rising cases, and to address the "disturbing case" of Purwanti killing Har, a crime which the judge described as "callous and heinous" with numerous aggravating factors that came into play.

Michael Leong Kit Heng, the 58-year-old husband of Har, stated that the life sentence was a firm and fair one in spite of Purwanti having avoided the death penalty, and he described her as a "dangerous person".

Leong Meng Wei, Har's 33-year-old older son, called the murder of his mother "stupid" and refused to accept Purwanti's apology like the rest of his family members.

Like Purwanti, Sundarti was convicted of manslaughter after the trial court found her not guilty of murder on the grounds that she was cruelly deprived of food and maliciously abused by Ng, which caused her to kill the two victims under sudden and grave provocation.

They stated that there had been a significant amount of aggravating factors in Purwanti's case that called for the maximum punishment of a life term despite her age, especially her premeditation to kill Har, the concise steps she took to cover up her crime and the vulnerability of the victim.

[27][28] The judges also expressed their concern that ten years was inadequate to address the graveness of Purwanti's crime and also considering the public interest to prevent more cases of maids committing crimes against their employers, a deterrent sentence was needed in similar cases like Purwanti's, and she should be incarcerated for a longer period of time to ensure the principles of rehabilitation and retribution had been served.

[17] Purwanti's former lawyer Subhas Anandan appeared on the show to be interviewed regarding the case, and in response to the perception that maids were given special treatment after they escaped the gallows for murdering their employers, Anandan stated that the maids were not receiving special treatment from the law and they did not receive the death penalty due to the circumstances that allowed them to not face execution, like diminished responsibility or sudden and grave provocation, and these claims could also be raised by any Singaporeans who were charged for murder.