Li Kim Pui v. The Queen
|
CACC000628/1969 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 628 OF 1969
Coram: Rigby, S.P.J. Date of Judgment: 24 September 1969 ----------------- JUDGMENT ----------------- 1. The appellant, a youth 19 years of age, pleaded guilty to the charge preferred against him of carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of 16. It would appear that the appellant had in fact been living with this girl for some months at the premises occupied by his mother. It would further appear that the mother disapproved of this association and had in fact told the girl's mother what was happening; but the girl's mother apparently was either unwilling or unable to do anything about it. 2. The girl was born on the 16th September 1953. The offences were committed between the 1st February 1969 and the 14th July 1969, so that when the first offence was committed the girl would then have been only seven months short of sixteen. 3. The learned magistrate very rightly adjourned the matter for a report from the probation officer. That report was produced before the magistrate and is now before this Court. The report is by no means an unfavourable one towards the appellant, and the probation officer had put in his report the suggestion,- and, of course, he could do no more than suggest - that if the magistrate thought fit, a Probation Order could be made, with a residential condition that the appellant resides in a hostel for the first six months of the period specified under that Order. 4. Notwithstanding that recommendation, the learned magistrate made an order that the appellant be sent to a Training Centre, where he would be detained for what would be the minimum period of nine months and a maximum period of three years. 5. The appellant appealed against that order. 6. With respect to the learned magistrate, I am firmly of the opinion that the order made by him is entirely wrong in principle. In my view detention at a Training Centre is an appropriate order to be made in cases of young persons who, by their past conduct, have shown a marked tendency or predisposition towards a career of crime or dishonesty. 7. The appellant's conduct in this case, although clearly reprehensible, certainly does not fall within that category. I am satisfied that this appeal should be allowed and the order made by the learned magistrate set aside. In lieu thereof I direct that a conviction be recorded in this case, but that the appellant be discharged under Section 36 of the Magistrates Ordinance, conditional upon him entering into a bond, himself in the amount of $250.00, to be of good behaviour and to appear for sentence any time when called upon within the period of the next twelve months. Representation: Peter Chan (T.M. Chow & Co.) for Appellant. Penlington, P.C.C. for Crown/Respondent. |