|
DCCC 437/2009
[2019] HKDC 1437
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO 437 OF 2009
-----------------------------
-----------------------------
| Present: |
Ms Lorinda Lau, Counsel on fiat, for HKSAR |
|
Mr Gordon Wong instructed by Messrs. Soloman C.Chong & Co. assigned by the Director of Legal Aid for the defendant. |
| Offence: |
Failing to surrender to custody without reasonable cause (無合理因由而沒有按照法庭的指定歸押) |
--------------------------------------
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
--------------------------------------
1. The defendant, now 75, pleaded guilty before me to one count of failing to surrender to custody, contrary to section 9L (1) and (3) of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, Cap. 221.
2. Some ten years ago in the morning of 2 September 2008, the defendant together with other people took part in a vicious attack on his business partner resulting in his being charged with a section 17 wounding offence.
3. The case was transferred to the District Court for trial, and in the meantime the defendant was granted bail but at the plea hearing in the District Court on 19 May 2009, the defendant failed to turn up.
4. Having absconded for ten years, on 28 May 2019 the defendant was arrested at the Lo Wu Checkpoint when he was trying to get back into Hong Kong from the Mainland.
5. As things turn out, the result is a much better one for the absconded defendant because the police today could no longer contact the victim whose whereabouts remain unknown. And it is for this reason the defendant only faces a single charge of failing to surrender.
6. The defendant has one previous conviction of conspiracy to defraud back in 1987 for which he was fined $15,000.
7. The defendant is married with two children, a son and a daughter both in their 30s, but separated from his wife since 1990s. The wife and daughter emigrated to the UK in 1999; he would be living with his son in Hong Kong after release from prison.
8. Counsel for the defendant said that the reason the defendant left the jurisdiction was because he was afraid of the consequences that he might end up in jail for a long time.
9. The offence carries a maximum term of 12 months’ imprisonment on indictment. Defence counsel relying on the case of Lam Kin Chung [2007]2 HKC 451 said that the appellant there had absconded for 9 years and 4 months, the court of appeal considered a starting point of 9 months appropriate.
10. Given the facts of the present case, I take 9 months as the starting point, and reduce it by one third to reflect his timely plea.
11. There being no reason for further reduction, the final sentence is one of 6 months’ imprisonment.
|