HKSAR v ROSE JOHN ALEXANDER PORTER

DCCC 279/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 279 OF 2009

____________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

1.  The defendant pleads guilty to possession of two forged travel documents (charge 1); possession of a false travel document (charge 2) both charges contrary to section 42(2)(c)(i) and (4) of the Immigration Ordinance, Chapter 115; and possession of false instruments, namely a Hong Kong Immigration Arrival Stamp impressed on four different travel documents, contrary to section 75(1) of the Crimes Ordinance,       Chapter 200 (charge 3).

2.  In summary on the 15th January this year the defendant entered Hong Kong using his own passport to clear immigration at the airport.  When passing through the green channel Chief Customs Officer Ho stopped the defendant.  Four suspected false/forged passports were found inside the defendant’s handbag, two British passports and two French passports, on which a total of 13 questionable Hong Kong Immigration stamp impressions were found.

3.  Three of the passports bore the defendant’s photograph but with different identities whereas the fourth passport bore the photograph of a female.  The defendant was unable to explain why he possessed different passports and said he did not know the female whose photograph was on the other passport.

4.  The defendant was referred to the Immigration Department for investigation.  Under caution the defendant said he was entrusted to bring the passports to Hong Kong for a reward of US$500.  He knew three of the passports bore his photograph but not his personal particulars, having given his photograph to the middleman for arrangement of the passports. The defendant was to go to the Excelsior Hotel where he would meet a friend of the middleman, who would take him to the Hong Kong and Kowloon Stations to obtain three boarding passes to enable three people to leave Hong Kong. 

5.  Forensic examination showed that the two British passports were forged (charge 1).  The authenticity of the two French passports could not be determined in the absence of a control French passport for comparison. The French passport bearing the defendant’s photograph but not his personal particulars forms the basis of charge 2, possession of a false travel document. 

6.  Forensic examination also showed that the 13 questionable Hong Kong Immigration stamp impressions were also forged.  When interviewed the following day the defendant admitted he was sure that four of the Hong Kong Immigration stamps, one on each passport, were not genuine as the passports were given to him in Bangkok, whereas if the stamps were genuine the holder would still have been in Hong Kong as there was no exit stamps on the passports (charge 3).  Whilst I note in one of the passports there is in fact an exit stamp the defendant confirms in court that he realised the stamps were false when he was given the passports.

7.   In passing sentence I have carefully considered everything said on the defendant’s behalf by Miss Chan, including that he acted out of greed as his income in Thailand as a teacher was irregular. 

8.  The defendant says he was a courier.  Whilst he may have brought the passports to Hong Kong his role was clearly not limited to simply that of a courier.  The defendant provided his photograph to facilitate the forgery of the passports and was to obtain boarding passes using the passports.  Although it must be said how others were to use the boarding passes in conjunction with the passports bearing the defendant’s photograph, is difficult to imagine.  What is clear however is that the defendant was connected to a larger syndicate involved in the use of forged passports, even if he himself was not part of the syndicate.

9.  Offences relating to forged and false passports are serious offences, involving an international dimension for which deterrent sentences are required for the reasons endorsed in HKSAR v MA Yuen-chi CACC 537/2005, a case concerning a courier of forged passports. 

10.   I am satisfied the proper starting point after trial on charge 1 is one of 3 years imprisonment; on charge 2 one of 2 years imprisonment and on charge 3 one of 18 months imprisonment.  Whilst all the offences arose at the same time sentence must reflect that there was three forged/false passports and that four passports contained the false Hong Kong Immigration stamps.  I am satisfied an overall starting point of 3 years and 6 months imprisonment is appropriate.

11. Giving the defendant full credit for his pleas of guilty he is sentenced as follows:

Charge 1 - 2 years imprisonment;

Charge 2 - 16 months imprisonment, 4 months consecutive and 12 months concurrent to charge 1;

Charge 3 - 12 months imprisonment concurrent to charges 1 & 2;

I am satisfied a total sentence of 2 years and 4 months imprisonment properly reflects the defendant’s criminality on these three charges.