A DCCC 196/2013 A
B IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE B
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO 196 OF 2013
C C
----------------------
D D
HKSAR
E E
v
F F
Chandra Aries-makmur
G G
----------------------
H H
Before: HH Judge Yiu
Date: 14 June 2013 at 11.06 am
I Present: Mr Neil Mitchell, Counsel on fiat, for HKSAR I
Mr Dominic Yeung, instructed by Messrs Y. T. Chan & Co, assigned
J by the Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant J
Offence: (1) & (2) Indecent assault on another person (猥褻侵犯另一人)
K (3) Common assault (普通襲擊) K
L
--------------------- L
Reasons for Sentence
M M
---------------------
N N
1. The defendant is convicted after trial for two counts of indecent
O O
assault and also one count of common assault.
P P
2. While the victim, a 6-year-old girl, was living with her birth mother,
Q Q
her mother’s boyfriend, the defendant, had on one occasion at their home forced
R her to take off trousers, splay her legs and lick her private parts about 10 minutes. R
Then, the defendant also put his lower part into her mouth and told her not to bite
S S
but to move her head up or down also for 10 minutes.
T T
U U
CRT28/14.6.2013/ML 1 DCCC 196/2013/Sentence
V V
A 3. For the second incident, the defendant said teaching her sex A
education, took off her clothes and touched her private parts.
B B
C 4. For common assault, the defendant had dragged her to the toilet, C
pushed her head with great force that her head had a bump against the toilet bowl
D D
and the defendant also hit her head with the showerhead.
E E
5. The victim did not disclose all these incidents until she was about 12
F F
and wrote in her school journal that she had great suffering before and revealed
G that she had been sexually abused. She was very scared that he would find her G
and come to beat her.
H H
I 6. The matter was subsequently reported to the police. The defendant I
was arrested and positively identified by the victim.
J J
K 7. The defendant is 39 years old. He had a criminal conviction of K
unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under 16 about 20 years ago. The court
L L
shall treat him as a person of clear record according to the Rehabilitation of
M Offenders Ordinance. M
N N
8. The defendant had been in the catering service for some time but got
O married to the victim’s mother later on and they had two more sons afterwards. O
P P
9. Mr Yeung, in mitigation, stated that the incident was not the worst of
Q its type. The victim was not cross-examined on the incident, as the defendant’s Q
case was just on wrongful identification.
R R
S 10. The victim’s mother is still relying on the defendant and did write a S
letter supporting the defendant and said that the defendant is always caring and
T T
responsible.
U U
CRT28/14.6.2013/ML 2 DCCC 196/2013/Sentence
V V
A 11. Indecent assault is a serious offence, particularly in the present case A
when the victim was only 6 years old and the defendant was her mother’s
B B
boyfriend living with her.
C C
12. The court has made it clear that indecent assault on young children by
D D
adults are serious offences and the respective sentence highlights some crucial
E considerations, including that to deter others from committing similar offences, to E
show the abhorrence of member of the public to offences of this nature and to
F F
redress the grievance suffered by the victim and her friends and relatives. See
G HKSAR v Chan Ching Ho [2003] HKLRD 476 and HKSAR v Yau Kin Wai G
CACC 398/2003 and also in Secretary of Justice v Huang Long Wei CAAR
H H
5/2008.
I I
13. Also bearing in mind that it is rather difficult to detect because the
J J
child victim would normally be at a loss and feel too embarrassed to complain and
K the court will regard the protection of children as the most important consideration. K
See Secretary of Justice v Wong Tsz Kin [1998] 4 HKC 32 and HKSAR v Kam
L L
Wing Yin CACC 515/2005.
M M
14. No doubt these incidents had been deep inside the victim for so long
N N
that she could not help disclosing it when she was 12. The ordeals had been
O annoying and perplexing her life. O
P P
15. The impact report revealed that she could still remember the abuse
Q vividly, that she had a fear of males whom she perceived to be completely Q
unreliable or not trustworthy. She is always on guard against male. The
R R
psychologist also concluded that the violation did destroy her basic sense of safety
S and security, resulting in distorted and negative views towards self, others and the S
world. One may easily find the aftermath is long-lasting and could not be likely
T T
forgotten nor healed.
U U
CRT28/14.6.2013/ML 3 DCCC 196/2013/Sentence
V V
A 16. In HKSAR v Kong Yun Chiu CACC 315/2006, similar but more A
serious acts were involved, the court adopted eventually 5 years’ imprisonment as
B B
a starting point; while in another similar but less serious case in HKSAR v Chen
C Guojin CACC 112/2010, 3½ years’ imprisonment was adopted. C
D D
17. Taking into account all the mitigation and circumstances of the
E present case, for Charge 1, I would also adopt 3½ years’ imprisonment as a starting E
point and there is no other matter to reduce further. For Charge 2, 3 years’
F F
imprisonment and for Charge 3, 9 months’ imprisonment.
G G
18. On totality principle, these incidents were separate and distinct.
H H
However, I assess that the overall sentence of 4 years’ imprisonment would be
I appropriate. Therefore, the sentence shall be as follows: I
Charge 1: 3½ years’ imprisonment;
J J
Charge 2: 3 years’ imprisonment;
K Charge 3: 9 months’ imprisonment; K
For Charges 2 and 3, 3 months from each be made consecutively to Charge 1,
L L
making a total of 4 years’ imprisonment.
M M
19. So, defendant, for all the charges, 4 years’ imprisonment.
N N
O O
P P
(Yiu)
Q District Judge Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
CRT28/14.6.2013/ML 4 DCCC 196/2013/Sentence
V V