HKSAR v. WONG SIU MUN

 DCCC690/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 690 OF 2009

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  The defendant has pleaded guilty to two charges of unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under 13. Both offences occurred at an address at which the defendant was living. The first offence was committed on 20 April, the second offence on 30 April.

2.  The girl involved was born on 7 August 1996 and was 12 at the time of the offences. In March 2009 she left home and was not in contact with her family. Her mother reported her missing. On 2 March the girl called her mother stating that she was with the defendant. The mother asked to talk to the defendant on the telephone and she obtained the defendant’s address. Subsequently the mother picked up her daughter from outside the defendant’s residence in Sham Shui Po.

3.  On 20 April this year the young girl left home for school and later on her mother was informed that she was absent from class. Her mother rang the defendant asking if he had seen the young girl and he replied that he had not. The mother said that she was worried about her daughter and would be making a report to the police. On the following evening, that is 21 April, the mother again called the defendant asking if he had seen her daughter. He claimed that he had not seen her but said that some of his friends had seen her and he would assist in locating the girl.

4.  The matter was reported to the police the following day and the mother gave the police the address of the defendant. At midday on 30 April two police officers intercepted the defendant and the young girl in the corridor outside the defendant’s flat. She told the police that she and the defendant had had sexual intercourse on two occasions.

5.  She was interviewed and said that she came to know the defendant on the Internet some half year previously. She said she knew that the defendant was aware that she was 12 years of age. She said that on 20 April she ran away from home and came to stay with the defendant at his flat. She said that they had sexual intercourse on two occasions and on each occasion the defendant wore a condom. She said that the defendant was the only male with whom she had sexual intercourse.

6.  The defendant was interviewed under caution. He confirmed that he met the young girl via Internet a few months previously and he said that they became boyfriend and girlfriend in October 2008 and broke up around April 2009. Around 23 April the young girl called him and asked him to come down the stairs of his residence and he picked her up, and since then the young girl was staying at his flat with him. He confirmed that they had had sexual intercourse on two occasions.

7.  Medical examination of the girl on 30 April revealed that her hymen was intact.

8.  The defendant has a clear record. I was told that notwithstanding the age difference between the young girl and the defendant that they had a boyfriend/girlfriend relationship. I was told that this was known to the young girl’s elder sister and that the elder sister and the young girl had stayed at the defendant’s home on one occasion in January 2009.

9.  I am told that the defendant has been remanded in custody since the time of his arrest. I was told that the relationship between the defendant and this young girl had lasted for several months and the relationship turned sour in early April. The girl had a dispute with her family and left home and asked to stay with the defendant, and she asked the defendant not to tell her mother where she was staying.

10.  In mitigation it was urged upon me that the defendant had pleaded guilty at the first opportunity. He admitted the offence right at the outset. There was no question of inducement and the girl was saved the trauma of giving evidence. He had known the girl for some time before the intercourse took place, it was not as if they had met and they immediately had intercourse. He used a condom on each occasion and the girl’s hymen was intact.

11.  I was given a letter from the defendant who states that he is remorseful about this matter and realizes that what he did was wrong.

12.  I adjourned the case on the last occasion so that I could have the advantage of the training centre report. The report states that the defendant was born into a working class family in China and was the only child to his parents. Sadly, his father died in 1990 due to a heart attack. I was told that during his infancy he was entrusted to the care of his paternal grandmother in China who was lenient in child discipline. In 2001 the defendant came to Hong Kong for a family reunion with his mother.

13.  The defendant had displayed no serious behavioural problems whilst receiving education in China. However, when he resumed secondary education in Hong Kong, he failed to catch up with the school curriculum and his behaviour turned wayward gradually. He breached school regulations frequently and he befriended people who had triad associations. He dropped out of school in July 2004 and worked intermittently as a construction worker, a waiter, a kitchen worker and a delivery worker in different companies.

14.  The medical officer has confirmed that the defendant is mentally and physically fit for detention in a training centre. So from the information available and after a general assessment of his behaviour and attitude, it was concluded that he was suitable for detention in a training centre and that there is a place available for him.

15.  This is a serious offence. It is quite clear in this case that the defendant had known the young girl for some time before the offence was committed. Young girls of this age need to be protected. Having considered all the circumstances of the offence, I take the view that a training centre order is appropriate and I order that the defendant be detained in a training centre.