HKSAR v. Lam Lok Man Jason

DCCC 499/2021

[2021] HKDC 1383

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 499 OF 2021

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

1.Mr Lam pleaded guilty before me to one charge of Causing death by dangerous driving, contrary to section 36(1)  of the Road Traffic Ordinance, Cap 374. The particulars are that he, on 11 November 2020, at the junction of Yuen Wo Road and Sha Tin Rural Committee Road, Sha Tin, New Territories, in Hong Kong, caused the death of Wong Chi Hung, by driving a motor vehicle, namely, a private car bearing registration mark VM3866, on a road dangerously.

Facts admitted by Mr Lam

2.The yellow box junction of Yuen Wo Road and Sha Tin Rural Committee Road is controlled by traffic signals.  When the traffic signal of Yuen Wo Road is green, the traffic signal of Sha Tin Rural Committee Road would be red.  The speed limit of both roads is 50 km/h.

3.On the day of the incident, shortly before 11:25 am, Mr Lam was driving a private car along Sha Tin Rural Committee Road (northwest bound).  He overtook a KMB double-decker bus and cut into the fourth lane of Sha Tin Rural Committee Road.  The traffic signal turned red when Mr Lam was about 65 metres behind the white stop line.

4.Meanwhile, the deceased was driving a motorcycle on the third lane of Yuen Wo Road.  He stopped behind the white stop line waiting for the traffic signal to turn green.  When the traffic signal turned green, the deceased’s motorcycle started moving towards the box junction.  At this time, Mr Lam failed to comply with the red traffic signal of Sha Tin Rural Committee Road and speeded across the white stop line into the pedestrian crossing and further into the box junction.

5.In the result, the offside front of Mr Lam’s car hit the nearside of the deceased’s motorcycle at the box junction.  The deceased hit the windscreen of Mr Lam’s car and the former’s helmet fell off.  The deceased was thrown into the air and landed on the ground.  The deceased’s motorcycle hit the nearside of a taxi nearby while Mr Lam’s car dashed forward, rammed into the railings and then side-turned.

6.The deceased was unconscious and had no pulse or breath at the scene. He was certified dead at the Prince of Wales Hospital at 12:10 pm the same day.

7.There was no skid or tire mark left at the scene.

8.Forensic examination showed Mr Lam was driving the car at a speed of around 83 km/h immediately prior to the collision.

9.Autopsy report showed the direct cause of death was head and chest injuries and that the injuries were consistent with being the result of hitting by or against hard objects or surfaces with significant speed.

10.Mr Lam now admits that he caused the death of the deceased by driving the car dangerously in that he drove with excessive speed, failed to comply with a red traffic signal and failed to keep a proper lookout.

Criminal and Road Traffic Convictions Records

11.Mr Lam has no previous criminal convictions.  He however has one previous road traffic conviction in 2018 namely careless driving for which he was fined $1,500.

Antecedents

12.Mr Lam is aged 43 (42 at the time of the offence), educated to Master’s degree level by distance learning.  After the present offence, he worked as part-time storekeeper in a fashion company until being remanded in custody.  He completed the driving improvement course satisfactorily on 1.1.2019.  Mr Lam is married with one son aged 9 and the family lived in private housing in Kwai Chung.

Mitigation

13.Mr Andrew Lau of counsel mitigated on behalf of Mr Lam.

14.The following is a summary of the mitigation submissions.

15.After the accident, Mr Lam sold the matrimonial home in Kwai Chung to pay for various expenses.  His son is autistic and requires a lot of love and care from his parents.

16.Mr Lam is suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder.  He will need time to overcome his psychological hurdle.  Both Mrs Lam and their son are affected psychologically by the incident.

17.The strongest mitigating factor is Mr’s Lam’s remorse and plea of guilty.

18.Mr Lau submitted on Mr Lam’s behalf mitigation letters written by Mr Lam himself, Mrs Lam, Mr Lam’s father and a Pastor.  The gist is that Mr Lam is a filial son, a good husband and father; he is courteous and helpful; the accident has caused unprecedented emotional and financial strain to the whole family including a particular impact on the upbringing of his autistic son; and Mr Lam is remorseful and will not re-offend.

19.Specifically, Mr Lam in his mitigation letter apologizes to the victim and his family.

20.Mr Lau principally referred to Secretary for Justice v Liu Kwok Chun [2011] 1 HKC 70 and asked me also to refer to two District Court sentencing cases namely, HKSAR v Tong Pak Fai Sammy, DCCC 741/2020, and HKSAR v Leung Chun Ho Billy, DCCC 945/2014.

21.Mr Lau submitted that there are aggravating circumstances in this case namely, Mr Lam exceeded the speed limit over a short period of time and jumped a red light.  Mr Lam submitted that this should be within the bands of an intermediate culpability scenario, ie a momentary dangerous error of judgement or a short period of bad driving, not the more extreme situation of a highly dangerous, deliberate and selfish disregard for the safety of others.

22.Mr Lau asked for a lenient sentence on Mr Lam’s behalf.

23.Mr Lau has no submissions to make on special reasons relating to disqualification order.

24.Upon enquiry by the court, Mr Lau submitted that Mr Lam committed the offence because of a momentary lapse of judgement; he also submitted that shortly after the accident at the scene and at the hospital, Mr Lam was not thinking straight and therefore made the remarks about jumping an amber light signal and saying it wasn’t him who had hit the taxi; that Mr Lam certainly was not trying to place the blame on somebody else.

Sentence

25.I have considered all the mitigation submissions.  I have also viewed four video footage capturing the course of the accident played in open court without objection from the defence.

26.Causing death by dangerous driving is a serious offence for which deterrent sentences are called for.

27.In this type of offence, the culpability of the defendant is the dominant factor.

28.In this case, there was jumping red light at an excessive speed.  I accept the submission that Mr Lam was not trying to place the blame for what happened on somebody else.  I regard Mr Lam’s culpability as lying in the middle of the intermediate culpability range.  I shall therefore adopt a starting point of 2 ½ years’ imprisonment.

29.Mr Lam pleaded guilty early and so is entitled to a 1/3 discount on sentence.  There are no other mitigating factors of weight to warrant any further reduction.

30.Mr Lam will serve 20 months’ imprisonment.  In addition, he will be disqualified from driving all classes of vehicle for a period of 5 years.  I further order him to take and complete a driving improvement course at his own cost during the last 3 months of his disqualification period.  He will not drive or hold a driving licence again until he has completed the driving improvement course.