HKSAR v. NEOH WENG WAH

DCCC 381/2018

[2018] HKDC 1347

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 381 OF 2018

____________

_________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

1.  The defendant pleaded guilty on 19 October 2018 to one charge of using copies of false instruments, contrary to section 74 of the Crimes Ordinance (charge 1)[1], the maximum sentence for which is 14 years imprisonment.

2.  At the request of Mr Boyton sentence was adjourned for a psychiatric report, the defendant having been to Siu Lam while on remand in custody.  I also called for a psychological report in order to know more about the defendant. 

3.  Full particulars of the offence are set out in the facts admitted by the defendant on 19 October 2018.  In summary on 10 January this year a woman telephoned Mr Law Tsz Ho, Senior Branch Manager with HSBC, saying that her friend called Neoh Weng Wah, who was a king, had a huge deposit with the bank and wished to withdraw part of the deposit and invest the balance. 

4.  The woman gave Mr Law the account number 628-809415-888.  Upon checking the bank records Mr Law discovered that there was no such account and no person named Neoh Weng Wah held an account with the bank.  After consulting with the District Manager Ms Yeung Suk Fan, arrangements were made to meet the woman. 

5.  The next day at around 1500 hours the woman arrived at the bank together with the defendant and three other males.  The woman introduced the defendant to Mr Law as the “King of Borneo” and showed a book about Borneo which contained information and photographs of “Neoh Weng Wah”. 

6.  After Ms Yeung joined the meeting the defendant said that he had a huge deposit with the bank and wished to withdraw half of the deposit to invest in projects in Borneo. 

7.  The defendant submitted a copy of a false instrument purportedly from the Hong Kong Monetary Authority showing he had an account with HSBC together with copies of nine false instruments purportedly from HSBC showing that he had a bank account with HSBC and that in June 2016 he had deposited US$1,000 trillion with the bank. 

8.  Ms Yeung checked the bank signatures on the documents and found that the codes printed underneath the signatures were not correct.  HSBC having no such account and no person named Neoh Weng Wah held an account with the bank, Ms Yeung called the police.  The police arrived and arrested the defendant. 

9.   In a video-recorded interview the defendant, inter alia, said that he had no accounts with HSBC and did not have assets worth US$1,000 trillion. 

Mitigation

10.  In passing sentence, I have taken into account everything said on behalf of the defendant by Mr Boyton, including that the defendant, who is 79, was educated at Cambridge University and worked for the US Treasury for almost 15 years.

11.  I take into account that the defendant has a clear record.

Offence

12.  The defendant told the clinical psychologist that an acquaintance told him that he had deposited US$1,000 trillion in the defendant’s HSBC account.  The defendant said he was curious and went to the bank to cancel the account[2].  The defendant told the police that his visit to the bank was for fun.  

13.  The clinical psychologist says the defendant lacked logical thinking and his ability to differentiate right from wrong or real and unreal might be compromised[3].

14.  Mr Boyton explains that a few months before coming to Hong Kong the defendant was requested by a person from Mainland China to go to Hong Kong to withdraw money.  The defendant treating himself as the “King of Borneo” went to Hong Kong to obtain money for his country to use in building a railway.

15.  One of the three males who accompanied the defendant to the bank gave him the false documents.  The defendant did not really check the documents and just handed in the documents to get money for his country.  The defendant says he was slightly greedy.

16.  Upon clarification by the court Mr Boyton informs the court that when the defendant went to the bank he believed the copies of the instruments were false and that he used the instruments intending the bank staff to accept them as copies of genuine instruments and by accepting them as genuine to do some act to their prejudice.

Sentence

17.  In HKSAR v Mazhar Taha Ahmed Elmansouri the Court of Appeal in upholding a sentence of 5 years’ imprisonment for using a false bank draft in the sum of US$4 million, reviewed a number of similar cases where sentence ranged from 2½ years to 4½ years imprisonment[4]. The court stressed that “the citation of individual cases for the purpose of comparing sentences is of limited assistance since the particular sentence in anyone case must depend on the individual facts of the case”[5].

18.  Mr Boyton submits that it is almost laughable someone would try to obtain US$1,000 trillion from a bank.  Although there may have been no likelihood of success there was clearly a degree of planning and preparation in the commission of the offence.  No less than copies of ten false instruments were produced, including one from the Monetary Authority, together with a book seeking to show the credentials of the defendant as the “King of Borneo”. 

19.  I have had the opportunity of looking at the false instruments which, apart from some minor spelling mistakes (for example Wayfuong on E6), appear to be of good quality.  I have also looked at the book showing the defendant to be the “King of Borneo”, which is a very impressive publication.

20.  Further, Mr Boyton accepts that there is an international dimension to the case, the defendant living in Malaysia and who came to Hong Kong specifically to attempt to withdraw the money. 

21.  Notwithstanding the very large amount involved, taking into account all the circumstances of the offence including the amount; the nature of the false documents; the submission of a booklet seeking to show the credentials of the defendant as the “King of Borneo”; that there was no likelihood of success; the bank suffered no loss; the defendant came to Hong Kong from Malaysia to attempt to withdraw the money and the defendant has a clear record, I am satisfied the appropriate sentence after trial is 3 years’ imprisonment.

22.  Giving the defendant full credit for his plea of guilty reduces the sentence to 2 years’ imprisonment. 

Mental illness

Psychiatric report

23.  Dr Bonnie Siu is of the opinion that the defendant is suffering from dementia. The defendant is said to understand the charge against him, his position in legal proceedings and is fit to plead.

Psychological report

24.  The report reveals that in the past two years the defendant’s sons noticed deterioration in the defendant’s functioning including memory impairment, poor temper control, incontinence and midnight awakening.  The defendant would talk about business, including a project with the United Nations, but there was never a real business deal.  The defendant would also complain of hearing non-existent noises[6].

25.  Clinical observation and judgment by Backy Tong, clinical psychologist, suggested that the defendant suffered from memory impairment.  The defendant was unable to give a reasonable personal account of his past and instead gave information which was fragmentary and inconsistent[7].

26.  Grandiose delusion was also elicited, the defendant being preoccupied by the illusory greatness of his company and his exalted position and identity akin to an aboriginal king[8].

27.  The clinical psychologist also noted that the defendant had previously told doctors that he was preoccupied by the idea of buying HSBC and Queen Elizabeth Hospital[9]. 

28.  The result of psychometric tests suggested symptoms of dementia of which the defendant’s delusional ideation might also be a feature[10]. 

29.  The defendant lacked logical thinking and his ability to differentiate right from wrong or real and unreal might be compromised.  Under this vulnerable situation the defendant would also be an easy target to be manipulated by others to commit the offence[11].

30.  In conclusion the clinical psychologist is also of the opinion that the defendant suffers from dementia and states that further neuropsychological assessment was required[12].

31.  In HKSAR v Chiu Peng, Richard[13] the Court of Appeal accepted that a court may properly allow a discount in sentence where a defendant is suffering from mental illness which played a part in the commission of the offence.  The court said the justification for a discount in sentence by reason of mental illness was:

“…as a reflection of diminished criminality or culpability on the part of the accused who has committed a crime under an abnormal state of mind. He knew that it was wrong to commit the crime, but he did not appreciate that the commission was as serious as it was: the degree of culpability was thus lessened.”

32.  Chiu Peng, Richard was cited in HKSAR v Chen Xuehui[14]where the court reduced the sentence imposed after trial where the defendant suffered from Bipolar Affective Disorder and displayed florid symptoms at the time of the offence.  McMahon DHCJ in Chen Xuehui said that in determining whether the illness has affected one’s culpability for the offence requires an assessment of the nature and severity of the illness and an appreciation of the relevance of its symptoms to the commission of the offence. 

33.  Mr Boyton submits that the defendant was used by the person from Mainland China at whose behest he came to Hong Kong and that if he did not have the grandiose idea he was obtaining money for building a railway in Borneo the defendant may not have committed the offence. 

34.  Mr Boyton further submits that because of old age the defendant did not appreciate what he was doing and did not think clearly or realise the severity of the matter.  This Mr Boyton submitted may be because the defendant was suffering from dementia.

35.  Taking into account the age of the defendant, 79, and the opinion of the clinical psychologist that the defendant lacked logical thinking and his ability to differentiate right from wrong or real and unreal might be compromised, making the defendant an easy target to be manipulated by others to commit the offence[15], I am prepared to accept that the recent onset of dementia might have played a part in the commission of the crime and reduce the sentence by 4 months to 1 year and 8 months’ imprisonment.     

36.  Mr Boyton asks that the sentence be suspended by reason of the defendant’s age, clear record, that he may have been used and that he is now suffering from dementia.  Having regard to all the circumstances of the commission of the offence and the personal circumstances of the defendant, I am satisfied the offence is too serious for the imposition of a suspended sentence[16]. 

37.  The defendant is convicted and sentenced to 1 year and 8 months’ imprisonment.