HKSAR v. CHAN KEI SHING AND ANOTHER

DCCC952/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 952 OF 2010

———————-

HKSAR
v.
Chan Kei-shing (D1)
Tsang Chi-ling (D2)
———————-

Before: H H Judge Geiser

Date: 17 January 2011 at 11.29 am

Present: Mr Philip Swainston, Counsel on fiat, for HKSAR
Mr Woon Jee-quan, Freddy, instructed by Ivan Tang & Co., assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for both Defendants

Offence: (1) False imprisonment (非法禁錮)
(2) Criminal intimidation (刑事恐嚇)
(3) Blackmail (勒索罪)

———————

Reasons for Sentence

———————

1. D1, you have pleaded guilty to an offence of false imprisonment, contrary to Common Law and punishable under section 101I of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, Cap. 221, Laws of Hong Kong, the particulars being that you, between 8 and 9 July, together with a person called “Ah Sai”, unlawfullyand injuriously imprisoned “X” and detained him against his will.

2. You, D2, have pleaded guilty to two offences, the first being an offence of criminal intimidation, contrary to section 24(a)(i) and 27 of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap. 200, the particulars being that on 9 July of last year you threatened X with injury to himself with intent to alarm him, andthe second offence being an offence of blackmail, contrary to section 23(1) and (3) of the Theft Ordinance, Cap. 210, the particulars being that you, at Tuen Mun Plaza, on 9 July 2010, made an unwarranted demand of HK$89,600 from “Y”with menaces.

3. The Brief Facts, which you two defendants have agreed, are disturbing in that you took advantage of a young man, “X”, only 20years of age, who had gone to Macau for a day’s gambling with a friend of his. This was on the morning of 8 July of last year. He, that is “X”, had been approached by three rogues in Macau who had offered him free membership to gamble in a guestroom ofthe Lisboa Casino.

4. He was provided with chips, and after a period of time was told that he had lost money and he was to be escorted back to Hong Kongfor the debt to be settled. On arrival in Hong Kong, “X” was handed over to you, D1, who refused to release “X” until he,that is “X”, had provided you with details of his home address, parents’ names and contact details, etc.

5. “X” was later taken to a cyber café where you, D2, turned up and claimed to be the boss. It was you who accused “X” ofcheating by providing false personal details and threatened to beat him up if he did not provide true particulars. Out of fear,“X” provided true particulars of his home address to you. Later on you, D2, told “X” that he owed a total of a HK$130,000and demanded that he contact his parents for repayment. This sum was later on reduced to $89,600, and when “Y”, “X’s”father argued with you, D2, over this, you, D2, threatened him by saying that if the money was not repaid they would take “X”away and target his family.

6. This sort of behaviour is appalling and cannot and will not be tolerated by society. This whole episode must have been terrifyingfor not only “X”, who was effectively in the custody of you, D1, for some 16 hours, but also for the parents of “X”, thatis PW2, “Y”, and PW4, “X’s” mother. You, D2, added fuel to the fire by intimidating “X” and blackmailing his father.

7. In sentencing both of you, I take into account all that has been said on your respective behalves, but the only real mitigation,as far as both of you are concerned, are your pleas of guilty, which will be reflected in the sentence that I propose to pass onyou.

8. D1, on Charge 1, the charge of false imprisonment, I adopt a starting point of 2½ years’ imprisonment. I will reduce this by athird to take account of your plea of guilty, coming to 20 months’ imprisonment on Charge 1.

9. As far as you, D2, are concerned, on Charge 2 I adopt a starting point of 12 months’ imprisonment. I will reduce this by a thirdto take account of your plea of guilty, coming to 8 months’ imprisonment on Charge 2.

10. On Charge 3 my starting point is one of 3 years’ imprisonment. I will similarly reduce this by one-third to take account of yourplea of guilty, coming to 2 years’ imprisonment on Charge 3.

11. I order the sentences on Charges 2 and 3 to run consecutively to each other, coming to an overall sentence of 2 years 8 months’imprisonment in all.

12. With regard to the application for disposal of exhibits, I make an order in terms of that application. I refuse to return items21 to 24, as requested.

H H Judge Geiser
District Judge