Five-year jail term for former policeman who blackmailed man with intimate videos
A former police corporal was ordered to begin a five-year prison sentence today after the Court of Appeal dismissed his final appeal against his conviction for blackmailing a man over intimate videos involving the man and his fiancée. — Reuters pic
Thursday, 07 May 2026 9:32 AM MYT
PUTRAJAYA, May 5 — A former police corporal has been ordered to serve a five-year prison sentence starting today for blackmailing a man by threatening to report intimate videos of him with his fiancée to the religious authorities, after the couple was detained during the Movement Control Order six years ago.
A three-member bench of Court of Appeal judge Datuk Azman Abdullah has unanimously dismissed Mohd Aman Mustapa’s final challenge to his conviction. The 36-year-old had sought to overturn the Taiping High Court ruling on June 5, 2025, that jailed him for five years.
Azman, sitting with Datuk Noorin Badaruddin and Datuk Mohd Radzi Abdul Hamid, also ordered a warrant for the appellant’s arrest to begin serving his sentence immediately. Previously, he had been granted a stay of execution pending the appeal outcome.
On November 29, 2023, the Taiping Sessions Court sentenced Mohd Aman to three years in jail after convicting him of extorting the man, threatening to report the victim to religious authorities and blackmailing him to hand over RM300 at the public services office in Selama police headquarters, Perak, between 4.30am and 5.30am on June 18, 2020, under Section 385 of the Penal Code.
Noorin, reading the decision today, said the court was satisfied that the High Court judge had thoroughly examined all evidence, including trial notes, witness statements and recordings, and found no misdirection warranting the Court of Appeal’s intervention.
She said the third prosecution witness (male victim PW3), gave enough evidence to show the appellant deliberately frightened him with threats of reporting him to religious authorities and spreading embarrassing personal videos taken from his phone, forcing him to hand over RM300 in cash.
“The appellant’s actions were also suspicious and at odds with how a police officer should act when detaining a member of the public,” she said, adding that Section 385 Penal Code offences are not minor or technical, involving deliberate intimidation for extortion.
“In this case, the fear imposed on PW3 and his fiancée was that their intimate videos would be exposed and the matter referred to religious authorities and their families,” she said.
The judge said the case facts showed the appellant abused his police position by seizing PW3’s phone without legal procedure and separately took both victims to Selama police HQ in the early hours under suspicious circumstances.
“The evidence shows the appellant held PW3’s phone without legal authority, used the victim’s intimate videos as leverage, threatened to report the matter to religious authorities and his family, negotiated over the payment amount, set it at RM300 a month for three years totalling RM10,800, and only returned the phone after receiving the RM300,” she said.
Noorin said the appellant, a police officer tasked by law with protecting the public and upholding justice, had instead abused his power to intimidate an ordinary citizen for personal gain.
“The court cannot treat lightly any abuse of power by enforcement officers. When a police officer uses his official authority to threaten and extort members of the public, it undermines confidence in our law enforcement institutions,” she said, adding that such conduct amounts to a betrayal of public trust.
Noorin said the court also considered that the appellant’s actions went beyond a one-off demand for RM300, as the evidence showed he tried to bind PW3 to monthly payments for three years.
“This shows the appellant aimed to keep control and ongoing pressure on the victim to extract financial benefits over the long haul,” she said.
Noorin said the Court of Appeal agreed with the High Court’s finding that the three-year jail sentence imposed by the Sessions Court was inadequate and failed to reflect the true gravity of the offence.
“If punishments like this are too lenient, it sends the message that abuses of power by enforcement officers can be taken lightly. The court cannot allow that perception to take root in society,” she said.
She said the court also noted that the appellant was a first-time offender who had served as a police officer for 10 years, but he showed no genuine remorse for his actions and continued to blame the victim throughout the trial.
“With that, the court was satisfied that the conviction against the appellant was safe, backed by credible evidence and proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The High Court’s five-year jail term stands,” she said.
At today’s proceedings, the prosecution was led by Deputy Public Prosecutor Zaki Asyraf Zubir, while lawyer Ghazali Ismail represented the appellant. — Bernama
.png)
