CRIMINAL CASE NO. 13 OF 2009
COURT: See Wah-lun, Tang Ka-man, Wong Chi-man, Yeung Chun-kit and Chan Ho-leung, in respect of each of you, I have considered everything urged on your behalf by your counsel.And I have of course given separate consideration to each of you on the question of sentence.
As far as you, See Wah-lun, is concerned, your offences under Counts 1, 2 and 4 are all related to the conspiracy to murder under Count 3. I will pass concurrent sentences on you on all four counts.
As far as you, the other four accused, are concerned, your offence under Count 1 is related to the conspiracy to cause grievous bodily harm with intent under Count 2. I will pass concurrent sentences on each of you four on those two counts. And as far as the role which each of you four played, I will draw no distinction.
In respect of all five accused, I will of course take the most lenient view that can reasonably be taken. The appropriate total sentence for each of the five accused will be achieved by making the longest of the concurrent sentences against each accused reflect all the appropriate elements of aggravation, including those which come under another or other counts. That will achieve the appropriate total but no more than the appropriate total since all the sentences will be concurrent.
The maximum penalty for the offence under Count 1 (of acting as a member of a triad society) is 3 years’ imprisonment on a first conviction and 7 years’ imprisonment on a second or subsequent conviction. The maximum penalty for the offence under Count 2 (ofconspiracy to cause grievous bodily harm with intent), for the offence under Count 3 (of conspiracy to murder) and for the offence under Count 4 (of soliciting to murder) are the same. It is life imprisonment.
As to the counts against all five accused, namely Counts 1 and 2, the position is this. The evidence clearly indicates that the way in which the 1st accused acted as a triad member is more serious than the way in which the other four accused so acted; and his role in the conspiracy to cause grievous bodily harm with intent is more serious than theirs. As against all five accused, it has to be said that the grievous bodily harm which they conspired to cause with intent was to be carried out pursuant to a carefully planned attack.
There are cases which show that the sentence for causing grievous bodily harm with intent commonly range from 3 years’ imprisonment to 12 years’ imprisonment although everything will ultimately depend on the particular circumstances. There are also cases which show that conspirators are not infrequently punished in the same way as if they had completed the offence which they conspired to commit. Again, it all depends ultimately on the particular circumstances.
In respect of each of these five accused, I bear in mind of course that, behind the scene, there is a person or are persons even more blameworthy than any of them.
Turning to the 1st accused alone, the murder which he conspired to commit and which he solicited others to commit was likewise to be carried out to a carefully planned attack. The use of stun guns and very deadly knives was part of the plan.
As far as mitigation is concerned, the only real mitigation available is the mitigation available to the 3rd accused in the form of his previous good character. The other accused’s criminal record will of course not be held against them when they are sentenced. I have serious doubts as to whether a previous good character is effective mitigation in a case like this one. But I will err on the side of leniency if I err at all, and give the 3rd accused some discount, even though it cannot be much of a discount, for his previous good character.
When it comes to the role each of them played, I will draw no distinction between the 2nd to 5th accused.
A court should always be as lenient as possible, but the seriousness of a case cannot be ignored. The seriousness of this case speaks for itself once the basic facts are noted. Each of these conspiracies involved a plan to abduct a man in the street and take him as a captive to a prepared location. In the first conspiracy, the plan was to break his arms and legs at that location. In the second conspiracy, the plan went even further. It was to kill him at that location.
All things considered, I will sentence as follows.
1st accused, on Count 1, I sentence you to 2½ years’ imprisonment. On Count 2, I sentence you to 11 years’ imprisonment. On Count 3, I sentence you to 14 years’ imprisonment. On Count 4, I sentence you to 12 years’ imprisonment. All the sentences will be concurrent. So you will go to prison for 14 years.
2nd accused, on Count 1, I sentence you to 1½ years’ imprisonment. On Count 2, I sentence you to 9 years’ imprisonment. Those sentences will be concurrent. So you will go to prison for 9 years.
3rd accused, on Count 1, I adopt a starting point of 1½ years. On Count 2, I adopt a starting point of 9 years. For your previous good character, I will give you such discount as to sentence you to 1 year’s imprisonment on Count 1 and to 8½ years’ imprisonment on Count 2. Those sentences will be concurrent. So you will go to prison for 8½ years.
4th accused, I sentence you to 1½ years’ imprisonment on Count 1 and a concurrent term of 9 years’ imprisonment on Count 2. So you will go to prison for 9 years.
5th accused, I sentence you to 1½ years’ imprisonment on Count 1 and a concurrent term of 9 years’ imprisonment on Count 2. So you will go to prison for 9 years.