HKSAR v. WONG KIN CHUNG

DCCC1311/2011

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1311 OF 2011

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of possession of arms without a licence, contrary to section 13 of the Firearms and Ammunition Ordinance, Cap.238, Laws of Hong Kong, the particulars being that you on 9 August of last year at the private car search area of Customs & Excise Department, Shenzhen Bay Port Hong Kong Port area, Hong Kong, had in your possession two stun guns without a licence.

2.  The brief facts which you have agreed speak for themselves and indeed establish that at the relevant place and on the date in question, these two stun guns were found in the luggage compartment of your car.

3.  The guns were examined and were found to be capable of generating peak-to-peak pulsating voltage of 339.15 kilovolts and 347.77 kilovolts respectively.

4.  The telecommunications engineer of the Operations and Services Support Division of the Communications Branch of the Hong Kong Police, a Mr Tsang Wing-kei, has provided two evaluation reports on the respective devices and has also been called to give expert testimony this morning.

5.  The testimony that he has given and the information contained in his reports are very technical, but the essence of his testimony is that the power output of these two devices is very much on the high side.

6.  However, having said that, I do accept, as has been put forward on your behalf, that these two stun guns were kept by you for self-defence purposes, there being no evidence that you intended to use them for any unlawful purpose.  The devices had never been used by you in the past, and at the time they were found in your car, they were not hidden in any way, and indeed, at the time they had not even been charged.

7.  You are 50 years of age, divorced, and whilst you do have four previous convictions, you have kept out of trouble for the past 25 years.  You have worked hard to establish your interior design business, which I am told you started in 2000 and which had an annual turnover of about $3 million.

8.  As a result of your committing this offence, I am told that that business has now been severely compromised.

9.  There are no guidelines for offences of this nature; each case depends very much on its own facts.

10.  Whilst I have accepted that there is no evidence that you had these devices in your possession for an unlawful purpose, the fact remains that the velocity output of these devices is high, and in the wrong hands, are capable of incapacitating and immobilising a human subject.

11.  Taking everything into account, I will adopt a starting point of 2½ years’ imprisonment.

12.  I will discount that sentence by one-third to take account of your plea of guilty, coming to 20 months’ imprisonment.