A DCCC259/2010 A
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
B HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION B
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 259 OF 2010
--------------------
C C
HKSAR
D D
v.
E Zhong Mingjing E
F F
--------------------
G Before: H H Judge Longley G
Date: 14 May 2010 at 3.59 pm
Present: Miss Ranee Khubchandani, PP of the Department of
H Justice, for HKSAR H
Mr Mui Moosdeen Azmet, of Messrs A M Mui & Kwan, for
I
the defendant I
Offence: (1) Assisting the passage to Hong Kong of a conveyance
which carried unauthorised entrants (協助載有未獲授
J 權進境者的運輸工具前來香港的旅程) J
(2) Endangering the safety of others at sea (危害他人在海
K 上的安全) K
(3) Failing to stop (沒有停船)
L L
---------------------
M Reasons for Sentence M
---------------------
N N
1. Zhong Mingjing, you have been convicted on your own
O O
plea to one charge of assisting the passage to Hong Kong of a
P sampan carrying eight unauthorised entrants, contrary to section P
37D(1)(a) of the Immigration Ordinance. You have also been
Q convicted on your plea of one charge of endangering the safety Q
of others at sea, contrary to section 72 of the Shipping and
R R
Port Control Ordinance, and one charge of failing to stop the
sampan, contrary to regulation 20(1) and (3) of the Shipping and
S S
Port Control Regulations.
T T
2. You admitted the facts that were read to you but in
U order to clarify the nature of the chase before you were U
CRT37/14.5.2010/GTT 1 DCCC259/2010/Sentence
V V
A apprehended and the speed of your vessel, I heard evidence from A
two police officers, SSGT Hui Ka-wai and SPC 48051. Having heard
B their evidence and taking into account the facts that you have B
admitted, I am satisfied of the following.
C C
3. At about 1845 hours on the day in question you were
D D
the coxswain of an unlit sampan which crossed into Hong Kong
E waters in Mirs Bay carrying eight male unauthorised entrants, E
all mainland males. Although it was almost dark, your vessel was
F unlit. On your own admission, you had no prior training in F
driving sampans and were unlicensed to do so.
G G
4. You admitted that you had picked up the eight men at
H H
Nan’ao. Neither you nor any of your passengers were wearing life
I
jackets; indeed, there were no life jackets on board the sampan, I
nor was there any fire-fighting equipment. The sampan had no
J navigation lights for night-time navigation. The ship inspector J
who subsequently inspected the vessel concluded that for these
K reasons the sampan was unseaworthy. K
L L
5. Your vessel was picked up on police radar travelling
at about 13 knots as it entered Hong Kong waters travelling in
M M
the direction of Crescent Island. Thirteen knots was not an
N excessively fast speed if the vessel had been otherwise safe. A N
police vessel, PV5, which was positioned behind Crescent Island,
O was notified. O
P P
6. At about 7 pm, your vessel came into sight of those on
board the police vessel. It approached your vessel at a speed of
Q Q
about 25 to 30 knots. When it was about 10 metres from your
R vessel, it switched on its warning light. Your response was to R
accelerate your vehicle away at what must have been approaching
S the top speed of the sampan in the circumstances. The police S
vessel switched on its blue light and shone a searchlight on
T T
your vessel and used it to signal to your vessel to stop. You
ignored it.
U U
CRT37/14.5.2010/GTT 2 DCCC259/2010/Sentence
V V
A 7. For the next 4 minutes or so there was a chase between A
your vessel and the police vessel. SPC 48051 has drawn a sketch
B to give a rough indication of the main directions taken in the B
course of the chase. During the chase, the two vessels were very
C C
close to each other, about 2-3 metres. The vessels were running
a parallel course but your vessel was for most of the chase
D D
slightly ahead of the police vessel. SPC 48051, who was on the
E police vessel, estimated that your speed must have been at least E
20 knots because that was the speed which he said the police
F vessel must have been travelling at in order to glide in the F
water.
G G
8. What was particularly dangerous was not so much your
H H
speed but the manner in which you navigated the vessel during
I
the chase. You would suddenly turn your vessel to the left or I
right during the course of the chase. Those turns are not
J indicated on SPC 48051’s sketch. The officer said that over J
10 times you attempted to turn your vessel into what would have
K been the path of the police vessel. This manoeuvring caused the K
police vessel to decelerate and turn sharply. SPC 48051 said
L L
that on occasions the police vessel was caused to tilt as much
as 45 degrees. Not only was there a risk of collision but there
M M
was also a danger that your passengers would fall overboard.
N SPC 48051 described your navigating as very unsafe. That is N
obviously right.
O O
9. Eventually, for some unexplained reason, your outboard
P P
motor appears to have cut out and the police were able to
intercept your vessel. When you were later interviewed, you
Q Q
admitted that you had kept changing course in order to escape.
R Although you claimed that you only realised it was a police R
vessel later, I do not accept that you can have been in any
S doubt that this was a police vessel that was chasing you. S
T T
10. The offence of assisting the passage to Hong Kong of
unauthorised entrants is one viewed by the courts in Hong Kong
U U
CRT37/14.5.2010/GTT 3 DCCC259/2010/Sentence
V V
A very seriously. It carries a maximum term of 14 years’ A
imprisonment. In your case, the offence is aggravated by the
B fact that you were the coxswain of a vessel bringing eight B
unauthorised entrants in on a vessel without lights, with no
C C
life jackets and no fire-fighting appliances. A starting point
of 6 years’ imprisonment is appropriate on Charge 1.
D D
E 11. The particulars of offence of the 2nd charge of E
endangering the safety of others at sea makes clear that the
F conduct complained of was that you “steered the said motorised F
sampan in dangerous manoeuvre during pursuit by police vessel
G G
PV5.” The conduct alleged is therefore distinct from the
allegations regarding the lights and equipment carried in the
H H
vessel. I bear in mind that there was no actual collision in
I
this case and no evidence that anybody was even thrown off I
balance by what occurred. I bear in mind that there were no
J other vessels in the vicinity. J
K 12. Nevertheless, to attempt to escape the police by K
increasing your speed, swerving your vessel and turning it into
L L
the path of a police vessel is dangerous conduct. I adopt a
starting point of 18 months’ imprisonment in respect of that
M M
offence.
N N
13. The 3rd offence of failing to stop is part of the
O attempt you made to escape from the police vessel. I adopt a O
starting point of 3 months’ imprisonment.
P P
14. I have taken into account the skeleton submissions
Q Q
given to me by Mr Mui and all that he has said on your behalf. I
R bear in mind what you said in your letter that was read out to R
me; in particular, I bear in mind that you are a young man who
S has recently married and have a young baby and that this is your S
first offence in Hong Kong and in the mainland. However, the
T T
only real substantial mitigation in this case are your pleas of
U U
CRT37/14.5.2010/GTT 4 DCCC259/2010/Sentence
V V
A guilty, for which you are entitled to the usual discount of A
one-third.
B B
15. Having taken into account the overall criminality in
C C
the case, I pass sentence as follows:
D D
Charge 1: 4 years’ imprisonment;
E E
Charge 2: 1 year’s imprisonment, which is to run
F consecutively to the sentence on Charge 1; F
G G
Charge 3: 2 months’ imprisonment, which is to run
concurrently with the sentence on Charge 2
H H
but consecutive to the sentence on Charge 1.
I I
16. The overall sentence is 5 years’ imprisonment.
J J
K K
L L
Longley
District Judge
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
CRT37/14.5.2010/GTT 5 DCCC259/2010/Sentence
V V