HKSAR v IP LAI YIN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF APPEAL

1998, No.310
(Criminal)

_____________________

_____________________

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

J U D G M E N T

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

Power, V.-P. (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. The applicant (D4 at trial) was convicted after he had pleaded not guilty to a charge of false imprisonment and to a charge of conspiracy to blackmail.

2. This was a typical case of false imprisonment and extortion from a man who had been on a gambling expedition to Macau. The victim was escorted back to Hong Kong by one of the four defendants. The applicant admitted that he then participated as one of the guards after the man had arrived back in Hong Kong. Another of the defendants had since made the demands for money on the family.

3. The applicant has one previous conviction for attempting to obtain property by deception and he was ordered in consequence to do 100 hours of community service. The judge obtained a report, which showed that the applicant was involved with triad and quasi triad associates and that he had ignored the requirements of the community service order. He has shown no remorse whatsoever of this offence.

4. The trial judge when sentencing said:

"You are approaching 19 years old. I am satisfied that you were closer to the fountainhead than the others in this case. I believe also that you have been under triad influence for a longer time than the others. The sooner you receive appropriate rehabilitation, the better.

As I have indicated, you have been off the rails for some years and you require a longer period of disciplinary training which will include both educational and vocational aspects. This can only be adequately provided by the training centre. I do not believe that a short, sharp shock will be enough in your case. Your response to the last court order was most unsatisfactory. I, therefore, revoke the community service order.

You are sentenced to a period in the training centre for both these offences."

5. We are satisfied that the order made by Judge Davies was an entirely appropriate one. We dismiss without hesitation the applicant's suggestion that it was too severe. It was not. The applicant is clearly in need of the further discipline and training that he will receive in the training centre, and it is hoped that that will bring home to him the serious consequences of his criminal behaviour.

6. The application is dismissed.