The Attorney General v. Chau Pak-loi
Read the full judgment text of CAAR 1/1978 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment.
1. The respondent pleaded guilty to indecent assault of a girl aged 8 and was sentenced to a fine of $750. The Attorney General applied for a review of that sentence on the ground that it was manifestly inadequate. When the case came before the court we ordered that reports be submitted to the court from a psychiatrist and a probation officer. We have received two very helpful reports.
|
CAAR000001/1978
Coram: Briggs, C.J., Huggins & Pickering, JJ.A. Date of Judgment: 13th March, 1978. ----------------- DECISION ----------------- 1. The respondent pleaded guilty to indecent assault of a girl aged 8 and was sentenced to a fine of $750. The Attorney General applied for a review of that sentence on the ground that it was manifestly inadequate. When the case came before the court we ordered that reports be submitted to the court from a psychiatrist and a probation officer. We have received two very helpful reports. 2. The respondent, a man aged 53, is the father of a large family and bears an excellent character apart from the present case. As the result of the present case he has lost his job. He was employed at the time of the offence as a lifeguard in a swimming-pool. 3. The victim was not seriously hurt though she was very frightened by the indecent assault. The reports sent to the court suggest that this was an isolated incident and gave a credible reason why the incident occurred. 4. We think that the best course to take is to grant the application of the Attorney General, to remit the fine of $750 and to place the respondent on probation for a period of twelve months. The special condition of the probation order will be that the respondent will attend the Yaumati Psychiatric Clinic as an out patient.
Representation: Lucas for crown/appellant W. Wong (C.P. Tsang & Co.) for respondent |