HKSAR v. Leung Man Chun and Others

DCCC 437/2018

[2018] HKDC 1575

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 437 OF 2018

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence of X (PW1)

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

Charge

1.X (PW1) faces a charge of contempt committed in the face of the court punishable by the court summarily for disobeying a witness summons requiring him to attend before a court as provided in section 36(1) of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, Cap. 221.

Background to the case against X

2.X was the victim in a case of blackmail and false imprisonment.  Four defendants were jointly charged with the two offences. Trial was to take place on 26 – 30 November 2018.  Despite the personal service of a witness summons on him, he was absent in court on the dates of trial. Despite immense efforts by the police to contact him, he was not available.  He did not contact the police or anyone to leave a message either.  On 5 December 2018, he was arrested under a warrant of arrest. 

3.According to the Prosecution’s Opening, X was abducted from an amusement game centre and detained against his will for 2 days by a group of males, including the defendants, in various hotels. Meanwhile he was to contact his family members to raise $200,000 to compensate an arrested drug trafficker, as pre-promised settling-in money. 

4.A key witness being absent with no prospect of his attendance, the prosecution had to take the realistic course to offer no evidence against all 4 defendants on the charge of false imprisonment and against 3 defendants on the charge of blackmail.  The remaining defendant on the charge of blackmail, D1, had made the unwarranted demand with menace in the face of X’s father and grandfather.  Therefore, X’s absence in court had no effect on the case of blackmail against D1.  D1 pleaded guilty and was sentenced to imprisonment for 30 months. 

5.Today X admits to the charge of contempt.  In mitigation, I am informed that he is 24 years of age.  He is a lorry driver with an income of $28,000 per month.  He lives with his grandparents, parents, and 5-year-old daughter.  His ex-wife lives apart with their 4-year-old son. 

6.He absented himself from court attendance as he feared that the criminal syndicate might go against his family members if he testified against them in court.  The prosecutor said that he had not told the police of his fear.  I did not think it required such mention on his part for the police to contemplate offering witness protection.  The police had more than enough experience to show understanding and sympathy. 

7.I consider that 3 months’ imprisonment shall be appropriate.  However, given that he had had a bitter time being detained since 5 December 2018 and that he had been under a lot of stress to be a witness without any suggestion of protection by the police, I shall suspend his sentence for 2 years.