HKSAR v. Wong Ka Tsun

DCCC 492/2015

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 492 OF 2015

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant has pleaded guilty to three offences of unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under the age of 13 years. He has agreed the facts of the case as well and been convicted.

2.The victim was born on 20 January 2003, and the defendant who was aged 19 at the time came to know her through online video games, and they met and had sexual intercourse on three occasions.  Those were on 27 July 2014, on an unknown date between 16 August and 30 August of the same year and then again on 23 November 2014.  The victim had told the defendant she was 11 years old when they first met in June 2014. 

3.Eventually, the matter came to the attention of school teachers and the mother made a report to the police.  The defendant has frankly admitted his intercourse with this young girl.

4.As far as the defendant’s background is concerned, he is a person of clear record.  He is now aged 20. 

5.Because of the nature of the offence and his age, I obtained reports on the defendant.  They are psychological and psychiatric reports.  The conclusions of these reports I would describe as unremarkable.  The defendant has normal sexual tendencies, he is not a paedophile, and he has a low risk of re‑offending.  And the other reports I obtained were reports of Correctional Services Department and also a report about whether he is suitable for community service order.

6.My approach to sentencing is based on the age of the defendant.  He is still 20 years old.  Of course, one acknowledges these are serious offences.  A person who was not under the age of 21 could expect an immediate term of imprisonment, and that term of imprisonment would be dependent largely upon the difference in age between the victim and the defendant.  And of course, when sentencing a person under the age of 21, the court must also look at other options for sentencing, including the various forms of detention and training offered by the Correctional Services Department.

7.As far as the reports from the Correctional Services Department, they look at the defendant’s suitability for rehabilitation centre, detention centre or training centre.  The conclusion of the report from the Correctional Services Department is that the defendant has weak self-control ability and weak law-abiding concept, and it appears disciplinary training coupled with statutory supervision is considered beneficial to his reformation.  He is considered suitable for detention in a detention centre.

8.As far as the report from the probation service in respect of community service is concerned, the defendant is not recommended.  The report does set out the background of the defendant which is also set out in the reports of the Correctional Services Department.  The defendant is described as having introverted personality and limited social circle.  He is enthusiastic in sport such as fencing and swimming.  He has in fact taught fencing in the past.  He has been a swimming coach, life-saving guard and a salesman.  He expresses remorse for committing these offences.

9.The report says that he did not reveal much why he committed the offence on three separate occasions over a number of months. It was also pointed out to him at the time of the interview that although he had no previous convictions, he was under a binding-over order for an offence of criminal intimidation.  And he professed that he realised that he had to bear his legal responsibilities on this occasion.

10.The defendant is described in the report as having weak insight which is similar to the weak self-control ability noted by the Correctional Services Department.  Because it is said that community service orders are work-orientated, it would be not suitable for the accused’s reformation.

11.Now, in terms of mitigation for the defendant, it is urged upon me to ignore the conclusion of the probation services and the community service suitability report and nevertheless impose a community service order.  It is said that the defendant has explained his reasons for committing these offences in the report given to the Correctional Services Department, mainly that he was in love with the girl. 

12.As far as that submission is concerned, the real cause of concern in both the reports is the defendant’s weak -- what is described as weak insight and lack of self-control, and that clearly is manifested by his getting involved in this offence, knowing the age of the girl, and also the repetition of the offence over quite a period of time. 

13.The defendant is aged 20 but it would appear for the reports to be an immature 20.  In view of that, it seems to be not arguable that the defendant is in need of some training to deal with the deficiencies of his character and to prevent repetition of offending of this nature.  Girls of this age clearly need some protection.

14.The conclusion I have reached, having reread the reports, is that the defendant clearly needs some form of training.  As I have indicated, the offences of this nature clearly would carry a substantial term of imprisonment normally.  The defendant is still in a position where rehabilitation and training can still be entertained as a sentencing option by the court.

15.For these reasons, I am confident in following the recommendation presented to me by the Correctional Services Department as a form of sentencing for this defendant, which is that in respect of each of these offences, he will be sentenced to a detention centre.  So the sentence will be one of detention centre on each charge.