A A
DCCC858/2012
B B
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
C CRIMINAL CASE NO. 858 OF 2012 C
D
---------------------- D
HKSAR
E E
v.
F Wong Kwok-hing F
G ---------------------- G
Before: H H Judge Woodcock
H Date: 4 December 2012 at 12.17 pm H
Present: Miss Janice Cheuk, PP of the Department of Justice,
for HKSAR
I Mr Ho Chun Yiu, Stanley, instructed by Messrs Kong & I
Chang, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the
J Defendant J
Offence: Possession of arms without a licence (無牌管有槍械)
K --------------------- K
L
Reasons for Sentence L
---------------------
M M
1. Defendant has pleaded guilty today to one charge of
N possession of arms without a licence, contrary to section 13 of N
the Firearms and Ammunition Ordinance, Cap. 238. The arms in
O this case refers to a stun gun. O
P P
2. The facts of this case are that the police whilst
searching premises in Sheung Shui, found a stun gun which was
Q Q
made to look like a torch in a drawer in a bed. The search was
R on 13 August 2005. The present tenant at that time who was also R
under arrest, told the police that that stun gun did not belong
S to him. He told the police that it should belong to a previous S
tenant, which is the defendant in this case. The defendant had
T T
rented the premises just before that defendant. He lived there
between August 2004 and November 2004. In November 2004, the
U U
defendant stopped paying rent and disappeared leaving all his
CRT25/4.12.2012/ES 1 DCCC858/2012/Sentence
V V
A A
belongings inside the premises. The landlord at the time did not
throw away all his belongings but left them there in case he
B B
returned.
C C
3. Looking at the defendant’s criminal record, in January
D 2005 he was ordered to serve a Drug Addiction Treatment Centre D
order, so possibly in November 2004 he was in custody and
E E
therefore his landlord could not locate him which would explain
why the defendant left his belongings behind.
F F
G 4. Not long after this search, the defendant appeared in G
Sheung Shui Police Station and was arrested for possession of
H this weapon. He made a full admission to the police under H
caution. He explained that he had bought the stun gun in 2004 in
I I
Shenzhen for HK$150. It is common knowledge that in Shenzhen it
is very easy to buy these types of weapons, they are openly
J J
sold. The defendant told the police that because of the location
K
of the flat being near the border, he bought that stun gun for K
self-protection. He was worried about illegal immigrants being
L in the vicinity and worried for his safety and his mother’s L
safety who was living with him at the time. The defendant is
M disabled, having lost his left foot in an industrial accident M
which would explain his intention to protect himself with such a
N N
weapon.
O O
5. Prosecution accept that the stun gun was in possession
P for self-defence and not for illegal purposes. Moreover, the P
stun gun was kept inside a home as opposed to be carried around
Q by the defendant. In fact the defendant would probably never Q
have retrieved this stun gun as he was no longer living in the
R R
premises.
S S
6. Defendant is not a man of clear record, he has many
T previous convictions but none similar. T
U U
CRT25/4.12.2012/ES 2 DCCC858/2012/Sentence
V V
A A
7. I have heard mitigation put forward on the defendant’s
behalf giving details of his background. The defendant has given
B B
an explanation as to why after his arrest he jumped bail and
C went to live in China with his mother. He has also explained why C
he returned to Hong Kong and surrendered in August this year.
D D
8. Defence counsel has referred me to the authority of
E E
HKSAR v Li Hung Kwan [200] 1 HKLRD 204. Defence counsel has very
helpfully summarised the cases referred to in that authority.
F F
This authority is often cited where this offence is concerned,
G possession of a stun gun, and I have referred myself to this G
authority. I have also referred myself to the expert report
H submitted by prosecution. H
I I
9. This stun gun shaped as a torch could be described as
belonging to the lower end of dangerous stun guns. It has a
J J
middle to lower range of voltage. Having heard mitigation and
K
having considered the defendant’s reasons for buying and K
possessing a stun gun as well as the circumstances in which it
L was found, effectively abandoned by the defendant, I will take a L
lower than usual starting point because I find the facts allow
M me to take a lower than usual starting point. M
N N
10. I will take a 18 month starting point and give the
defendant a discount of one-third for his plea. Defendant is
O O
therefore sentenced to 1 year imprisonment.
P P
Q Q
A. J. Woodcock
R District Judge R
S S
T T
U U
CRT25/4.12.2012/ES 3 DCCC858/2012/Sentence
V V