Pang Yuen Tsan v. The Queen
|
CACC000661/1973 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 661 OF 1973 -----------------
----------------- Coram: Huggins, McMullin & Trainor, JJ. Date of Judgment: 8th November 1973. ----------------- JUDGMENT ----------------- Huggins, J.: 1. The Appellant and three other men were indicted for murder. The other three were acquitted and the Appellant was acquitted of murder but convicted of manslaughter. He now appeals against a sentence of six years' imprisonment passed upon him by the learned judge. 2. This is a type of case which is all too common in Hong Kong at the present time. The Appellant was a "blue lantern" member of the 14-K Triad Society. He and a number of his friends went to a dance. One of his friends became involved in a dispute - if "dispute" is the proper word to use: it was a trifling matter and it was brought about by his own conduct, the other man having accidentally bumped into him. This friend then persuaded the Appellant to go and buy two knives. In his statement to the police the Appellant indicated that he showed reluctance to go and buy the knives but that his friend then shouted at him. The fact remains that he then left the premises and went and bought the knives. He came back with them and it was one of those knives which caused the death of the Deceased. The Appellant knew that these knives were to be used to teach the Deceased a lesson. In those circumstances he is perhaps fortunate that the jury took a merciful view and obviously reached the conclusion that he himself did not intend to cause grievous bodily harm or that grievous bodily harm should be caused. The Deceased received nine wounds but it is not clear how all those wounds came to be inflicted: one was inflicted by this Appellant and the Appellant's account was that the Deceased in effect ran on to the knife. 3. The most significant factor in mitigation was that the Appellant was 16 ½ years of age at the time that the offence was committed. We are, nevertheless, fully satisfied that no form of punishment was appropriate other than imprisonment. 4. The only question which has concerned us was whether a sentence of six years was justified. It is urged on his behalf that he showed remorse and wanted to plead Guilty to manslaughter from the start. Counsel for the Crown, in our view very properly, declined to accept the plea to manslaughter. The probation officer was persuaded that the Appellant did show remorse. The after-care officer of the Training Centre was not so persuaded, and it may perhaps be observed that the after-care officer probably had more opportunity to see the Appellant than did the probation officer for the Appellant was detained on remand in the Training Centre and there showed himself to be aggressive and a disrupting influence. 5. As I said at the outset, this type of case is far too common. It is also far too common that very young boys are involved in this type of case. So much so that many law-abiding citizens go in fear of their lives. Heavy as this sentence is, we find it quite impossible to say that it was excessive and the appeal is dismissed. 8th November 1973. Representation: |