A transgender prisoner who was locked up after duping three women into having sex with him using a prosthetic penis has complained 72 times about being ‘misgendered’ since being sent to an all-female jail, it emerged today.
Complaints made by Tarjit Singh, 34, who was born a biological female, resulted in bosses at HMP Downview women’s prison in Banstead in Surrey investigating scores of allegations relating to his sexuality.
Singh is serving ten years in prison for assault and making threats to kill in May 2022.
Formerly known as Hannah Walters, but now identifying as male, Singh was arrested after three women came forward to tell of ordeals between June 2010 and March 2016.
It emerged he would keep clothing on and have sex with the women with the strap-on phallus when the lights were turned off.
He also falsely claimed he had children and even pretended to orgasm during sex.
When the victims began to ask questions, Singh became abusive and manipulative, telling one woman there was ‘more to a relationship than sex’ and that she should learn to talk about her feelings more.
He was jailed following a trial at Snaresbrook Crown Court.
Of the 72 complaints made by Singh alleging he was misgendered in prison, 11 have been upheld while four have been been partially upheld.
Prison officials marked the remaining 55 as no further action required.
The cost of each investigation and how long they took is not known.
Details of Singh’s time behind bars emerged in a court of appeal ruling which rejected pleas his jail sentence was ‘manifestly excessive’ after senior judges concluded he ‘contributed’ to much of the issues he faced behind bars.
In the run up to the hearing, three senior psychologists were assigned to examine Singh’s case and compiled 1,900 pages of medical notes to see if he was less ‘culpable’ for his offending due to his ‘gender dysphoria.’
Singh also said he had ADHD and ‘mind blindness.’
Lord Justice Dingemans, who was sitting with two other appeal court judge said: ‘The evidence showed that the appellant’s case was complex, and he had received nine separate diagnoses from medical professionals.
‘There was some overlap between some of the conditions, which meant that there could be difficulties in identifying the exact diagnosis.
‘The evidence also showed that the appellant, living as a man, but being anatomically female, would find prison conditions in a female prison difficult.
‘This is because of the effect of misgendering, which would happen from time to time, and the absence of any way of walking away from the situation.
‘This is notwithstanding the existence of a transgender policy which had been updated in January 2024.
‘The appellant had made 72 complaints while at HMP Downview, 11 had been upheld, 4 had been partially upheld, and 55 had been investigated and reported to be not the subject of further action.
‘It was also apparent that the fact that the appellant had exhibited challenging behaviour in custody meant that some opportunities to ameliorate his conditions had been lost.’
He added: ‘We do not find that the appellant had theory of mind deficits or mind blindness that mitigated his culpability.
‘This is because the appellant’s actions showed that he was actively deceiving the complainants by pretending to have children and by referring to a condom.
‘If the appellant had had the mind blindness, he would not have practised such deceits. This would have been because he would not have appreciated the need to do so.
‘We do find that the appellant has gender dysphoria and personality disorders, as was common ground between the experts.
‘But we do not, however, find that the appellant’s culpability was reduced by the fact that he has gender dysphoria or personality disorders.
‘This is because there was not sufficient connection between the appellant’s impairment or disorder and the offending behaviour.
‘As to the gender dysphoria, it is clear that the appellant would not have been motivated to commit the sexual offences against the complainants if he did not have gender dysphoria, but the existence of that diagnosis does not explain or mitigate the appellant’s deceit of the three complainants, or his assaults on two of the complainants or the threat to kill one of them.
‘All of the experts accepted, and it is obvious, that the fact that a person has gender dysphoria does not mean that such a person would deceive complainants into being penetrated by a dildo.
‘It is apparent from all the information before the Court that the fact that the appellant has gender dysphoria has caused real difficulties for the appellant.
‘The fact, however, that the appellant has gender dysphoria does not mitigate the appellant’s actions in deceiving the three separate complainants into being penetrated without their consent.
‘As for the personality disorders, there is nothing to show that these disorders were linked to the offending so as to reduce culpability, and none of the experts suggested that they were so linked.
‘The trial judge did refer to the fact that the appellant would face difficulties in prison as a mitigating factor.
‘It is apparent that some of those difficulties have materialised, and it is apparent that the appellant’s behaviour has contributed to some of the difficulties that he faces.
‘There is evidence that the appellant’s interests are being properly considered. We have considered the adjudications from the prison, but we do not consider that the judge should have given a greater discount.’
During Singh’s trial, one victim only found out about his sexuality after finding his strap-on prosthetic penis some months into their relationship. She told police officers that she felt ‘so stupid’ that she had fallen for such lies and added: ‘He looked like a guy, he acted like a guy.’
Singh told another victim that he had been born a boy, had a sex change to become a woman, and now wanted to be a man again.
The third victim met Singh after receiving a message from the dating website Plenty of Fish in 2014.
Singh told her that he would be having a sex change to become a woman. He was caught out after this relationship became abusive and the victim made a complaint to police.
During the trial the prosecution was able to present mobile phone evidence that showed a history of websites visited by Singh, which included FreeToMProsthetics.com – a company making ultra-realistic prosthetic penises.
Singh has previous offences including false imprisonment, perverting the course of justice, administering a noxious substance, having a Taser, going equipped for burglary, causing unnecessary suffering to an animal and assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
The court heard he was the product of an inter-familial relationship between his parents, had suffered abuse as he grew up and was taken into care at the age of 11.
By 14 he was given a supported housing placement, but lived in 40 as many broke down due to of his ‘challenging behaviour.’