HKSAR v. Chiang See Wai

Case No.DCCC 127/2012
Court
District Court
Date11 Jul 2012
Judge
Case Document
100%

DCCC127/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 127 OF 2012

----------------------

  HKSAR  
  v.  
  Chiang See-wai  

----------------------

Before: Deputy District Judge A. Tse
Date: 11 July 2012 at 3.03 pm
Present: Mr John Hemmings, Counsel on fiat, for HKSAR
  Mr Kwong Chi-ho, of Raymond Kwong & Co., assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Defendant
Offence: Dealing with property known or reasonably believed to represent proceeds of an indictable offence (處理已知道或合理相信為代表從可公訴罪行的得益的財產)

---------------------

Reasons for Sentence

---------------------

1.The defendant was convicted of one count of money laundering after trial. In short, the defendant attempted to cash a cheque in the sum of close to $1 million. The funds in the subject account were proceeds of at least three deception cases.

The defendant’s background and mitigation

2.The defendant is 57 years old.  He is married but has separated from his wife.  His wife and daughter live in Taiwan.  The defendant is unemployed and is living on CSSA of $1,300 per month.  He was a drug addict.  But according to the DATC report, although the defendant still uses cocaine irregularly, he is no longer an addict.

3.The defendant is suffering from a number of illnesses including emphysema, asthma, hypertension and depression.

4.Counsel informed me that another defendant who tried to cash a cheque of about $500,000 from the same bank account pleaded guilty in the Magistrates’ Court and was sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment.

Sentence

5.I have considered the facts of this case, the defendant’s background and mitigation very carefully.

6.In this case there was no evidence to show that the defendant knew the source of the funds in the bank account, or that he took any part in the deception.  His role was merely to withdraw the funds from the account.

7.He has eight previous convictions, but none of them were similar to the present case.

8.I adopt a starting point of 18 months.  The defendant was convicted after trial; he is not entitled to any discount.  He is accordingly sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment.

(A. Tse)
Deputy District Judge
Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under DCCC 127/2012