HKSAR v. HUI MAN-POW

DCCC35/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 35 OF 2009

----------------------

----------------------

Reasons for Sentence

1.  Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to two charges before this court. The 1st charge is that of dropping an object from a building, contrary to section 4B(1) of the Summary Offences Ordinance; and the second offence is that of arson being reckless as to whether life would be endangered, contrary to sections 60(2) and (3) and 63(1) of the Crimes Ordinance. Both offences were committed on 14 November 2008 and at the same time the premises at Room B, 2nd Floor in No. 153 Wuhu Street, Hunghom, Kowloon.

2.  In the early hours of 14 November, at approximately 2.30 am, a tenant of Room C of the same premises heard a loud bang sound outside her window. Having checked outside her window, she saw that the air-conditioner of Room B had fallen onto the alley beneath the flat. At about 3.10 am that morning, the same lady, the other occupant of the premises, Madam Cheung, was woken by an explosion. Room B was on fire. Madam Cheung immediately left her room and called the police.

3.  The fire brigade arrived soon afterwards and the fire was put out. The premises in question were damaged and the economic loss caused by the fire was estimated to be about HK$70,000.

4.  At about 6.15 am that morning, in the rear alley, police officers found you, the defendant, lingering and staring at the burnt flat. Upon inquiry, you stated that you were the tenant of Room B. Under caution, you admitted having set fire to the curtain inside Room B and having pushed the air-conditioner inside Room B down into the alley. You said under caution that you had just consumed drugs prior to doing this, and upon arriving home to your flat at Room B at about 2 am, you found the room hot and dark. You tried to turn on the light and the air-conditioner, but all your attempts failed, and as a result, you became angry and pushed the air-conditioner downstairs. You then set fire to the curtain with a lighter. As the room was on fire, you were scared and fled. A few hours later, you returned to the scene and were arrested.

5.  Mr Chan, counsel, has mitigated on your behalf on the last occasion and again today. Prior to sentencing you today, I called for a full range of reports on you, those being a probation officer’s report, two psychiatrists’ reports, a psychologist’s report and a drug addiction treatment centre report. I informed you that all sentencing options were open and that by calling these reports, it was no indication of any sentence I could pass. I indicated that I was of the view that the offences were serious and particularly the second offence of arson.

6.  In short, Mr Chan has said that the reason for your commission of these offences was a result of your having taken drugs, and you were unable to think properly, and after this event, this incident, you were admitted to Queen Mary Hospital and you were diagnosed to have suffered from a schizophrenia disorder.

7.  The reports are very detailed and I have taken into account all the contents of those reports. The drug addiction treatment centre report, the medical officer states you are not a drug dependent and therefore are considered not suitable for admission to a drug addiction treatment centre.

8.  The psychiatrists’ reports do not recommend hospital orders but recommend that you continue with outpatient psychiatric assistance. The psychologist also recommends providing you with psychological intervention, helping you enhance your problem-solving abilities and your interpersonal relationships. The probation officer recommends that on a marginal basis, to help you rehabilitate, a probation order of 18 months.

9.  Mr Chan has submitted to the court that the only viable option for this court and to give you a chance to rehabilitate is one of a probation order.

10.  Defendant, you are 32 years of age, are the youngest amongst four siblings although you have one twin brother. The majority of your family are in court today supporting you, save for your father. It appears that prior to commission of this offence, you had a distant relationship with your family members, and you had harboured much negative feeling to your poor family relationship. However, after the commission of this offence, you appear to have changed your attitude and so has your family and you have certainly become closer. It appears your relationship with your family is now at a stage where you are both starting anew.

11.  You have shown to the probation officer a keen motivation to change, and you have agreed that you will focus on family counselling and psychiatric and receive counsel for psychiatric matters and go on a drug detoxification treatment programme.

12.  It appears that the psychiatrists have explained that you have been diagnosed with a drug-induced psychosis when you had committed these offences. It was said that the doctors say you were hearing voices at the time. As a result of hearing these voices, you committed these offences. Since then, however, you have a stable mood and are no longer hearing imaginary voices or showing signs of mental disturbance.

13.  You are a person of clear record. This is your first offence. Save for your drug problems and some interpersonal relationship problem with your previous girlfriend, you have been leading a law-abiding life, but I see have had some problems with gambling. As I mentioned, I consider these offences, particularly the 2nd charge of arson, to be serious. But in view of your clear record, your motivation to start anew, that you are 32 years of age, I am prepared to pass a sentence upon you which is a rehabilitative one, and that rehabilitative sentence will be one of a probation order.

14.  Mr Chan tells me that you are agreeable to be placed on probation. Can you confirm that with me, please?

DEFENDANT: I am willing to.

15.  Right. Okay. Therefore, Defendant, I sentence you to 18 months of probation, and you shall abide by the following special requirements. You shall be of good behaviour and keep the peace, abstain from all kinds of dangerous drugs, submit to random urine samples for tests as directed by the supervising probation officer, receive drug detoxification treatment programme and other related rehabilitation activities as directed, receive psychiatric and psychological treatment as directed, and abide by all the usual orders, that is, to keep in contact with your probation officer and to inform your probation officer of any change of address.

16.  Now, the drug detoxification treatment programme is the one as stated in the probation report at the Ling Oi Centre which is a residential drug detoxification programme. This, as Mr Chan has rightly pointed out and submitted on the last occasion, you had found and which is a 12‑month residential programme, of which you would be required to reside there.

17.  Now, let me now explain to you a breach of this probation order. Defendant, if you breach any of the conditions of probation, for example, if you take drugs or if you do not satisfy the full treatment programme or commit any offence during this 18-month period, you will be in breach of this probation order. On breach of this probation order, you will be brought back to this court and this court will deal with you for your breach of your probation order, that is, the court may re‑sentence you for these two offences again and/or deal with any new offence which you have committed.

18.  It is likely, Defendant, I warn you now that this case is a very marginal case for probation. If you do come back for a breach of probation order, the options open to this court in respect of sentence is very, very limited. And as I think I should advise you, warn you now that it is likely that the only other sentence open to me may well be a sentence of imprisonment. Do you understand?

DEFENDANT: Understand.

19.  All right. So that is 18-month probation on both charges.