R. v. Tam Wai Chun

Case No.HCMA 424/1997
Court
High Court CFI
Date20 May 1997
Judge
Case Document
100%

HCMA000424/1997

1997 NO. MA 424

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL

(On Appeal from NKC No. 1310 of 1997)

_______________

BETWEEN
THE QUEEN Respondent
AND
TAM Wai-chun Appellant

_______________

Coram: Hon Yeung, J. in Court

Date of hearing: 20 May 1997

Date of judgment: 20 May 1997

____________________

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

____________________

1. COURT: The applicant pleaded guilty to a charge of theft and was sentenced to six weeks' imprisonment. She admitted to have taken 20 packets of Tempo Tissue from outside a Apollo Dispensary, worth $18. The offence was said to take place somewhere in Mong Kok and she just took the packet of tissue without paying for them.

The applicant has ten previous convictions, some of which are similar to the present offence. The probation officer's report, as well as the doctor's report, suggested the applicant had a long history of mental problem. Probation was not recommended as she had been put on probation on a previous occasion in respect of a similar offence, but her response was unsatisfactory as she defaulted reporting and failed to attend the arranged interview for psychological assessment.

Despite such mental condition, which obviously account for the present offence, the learned magistrate considered that he had no option but to impose an immediate custodial sentence. But the record kept of the proceeding is quite clear that the learned magistrate started off by trying to help this applicant. But in the light of the background and the history, particularly her previous convictions, the learned magistrate came to the view he really have no alternative but to impose an immediate custodial sentence, be it a short one.

I must confess that I, myself, find it not easy to think of an appropriate sentence to deal with an offender like you. Although to a lot of people, shoplifting is considered to be a trivial matter, but let me emphasise that it is by no means a trivial matter. Offenders, particularly repeated offenders, must expect to be imprisoned irrespective of the value of the property taken. The offence is very prevalent and unless the court take a perhaps tough attitude, people will not be detered from repeating offences of this nature.

I find it difficult to deal with you because it is clear from the record that one of the reasons at least for your repeatedly committing the sort of offence of theft or shoplifting is because of your mental problem. I'm aware that you have been put on probation in respect of a similar offence. I'm also aware that you have in fact not responded to the help by the probation officer, failing to co-operate with them.

But so far as this case is concerned, I'm prepared to take another chance in the light of your mental problems and in light of the history of the matter. Despite the probation officer not recommending you to be put on probation, I would act against such recommendation. I'm going to put you on probation for a period of 18 months in respect of the offence that you have pleaded guilty to. But I have to warn you that this is going to be your last chance. You have to accept the advice of the probation officer and receive such treatment as may be considered necessary for you. Are you prepared to be abide by such conditions?

2. MR MACRAE: My Lord, I'm sorry to interrupt. I wonder if a condition as to living and residing and working as directed by the probation officer might be...
3. COURT: I would include those condition as well.
4. MR MACRAE: I'm grateful.
5. COURT: You also have to reside and work as directed by the probation officer. You also accept such conditions?
6. ACCUSED: Yes.
7. COURT: Yes, in the circumstances, I will allow the appeal and quash the six weeks' imprisonment, in substitution thereof, the defendant is put on probation for a period of 18 months with the following conditions: (1) to reside and work as directed by the probation officer and (2) to receive such treatment as may be considered necessary.
Any consequential matters? All right.
8. MR MACRAE: Thank you, my Lord.
9. COURT: Thank you.

(Wally Yeung)
Judge of the High Court

Representation:

Mr Macrae (DLA) for the Appellant

Miss Polly WAN, Crown Counsel, for the Respondent

I/we certify that to the best of my/our ability and skill, the foregoing is a true transcript of the audio recording of the above proceedings
................................................
Date: 27 May, 1997