DCCC1209/2008 HKSAR v. NG TAI SING AND ANOTHER - LawHero
DCCC1209/2008
區域法院（刑事）Deputy District Judge A. Kwok13/9/2009
DCCC1209/2008
A DCCC1209/2008 A
B IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE B
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
C C
CRIM INAL C ASE NO. 1209 OF 2008
D D
----------------------
E HKSAR E
v.
F NG Tai-s ing (1 st Accused) F
CHEUNG Ngai-kwan (2 nd Accused)
G G
----------------------
H H
Coram : Deputy D istr ict Judge A. Kwok
I Date: 14 t h September 2009 I
Present: Mr. Phillip ROSS, Counsel on F iat, for HKSAR/Director of
J Public Prosecution. J
Mr. Victor C.F. CHEUNG instru cted b y Messrs. Tony Kan & C o.
K K
assig ned b y D.L. A. for the 1 st Accused.
Mr. John HALLEY ins tructed b y Messrs. Georg e C han & C o
L L
nd
assig ned b y D.L. A. for the 2 Accused.
M Offences : (1) Preventing the law fu l bur ial of a corpse (阻 止 合 法 埋 葬 屍 體 ) M
(2) Consp ir acy to per ver t the course of pub lic justice (串 謀 妨 礙
N N
司法公正)
O O
--------------------------
P Reasons for Sentence P
--------------------------
Q Q
1. The 1 st Accused, NG Tai-s hing was convicted after tr ial of one
R R
cou nt of “ Preventing the lawfu l bur ial of a corpse” (C harge 1) and the 2 nd
Accused, CHEUNG Ngai- kwan was convicted on her own p lea of another cou nt
S S
“Consp ir acy to per ver t the course of pub lic justice” (C harg e 2). The mitigation
T and sentence of the 2 nd Accused was adjou rned u ntil the conclus ion of the tr ial T
of the 1 st Accused. In the meantime, I called for a C ommu nity Ser vice Order
U (“CSO”) Repor t and her b ail was ex tended. U
V V
- 2 -
A A
B The facts of Charge 1 B
C 2. The facts of C harge 1 have b een su fficiently d ealt w ith b y me in the C
Reasons for Verd ict and I d o not intend to fu lly rep eat here. Suffice it to say
D that after his arr est, the 1 st Accused freely admitted to the p olice in P13 u nder D
caution that at the mater ial times, LAW joined him and his 2 fr iends and they all
E E
board ed a motor ized sampan ( “the b oat”) to go to Ling D ing Is land for fu n. The
1 st Accused steered the b oat and LAW w as stand ing at the fr ont of the b oat
F F
when it suddenly collid ed w ith a floating bu oy near Ap Li C hau Br idge,
G Aberdeen and the impact caused Law to fall backwards onto the b oat. LAW then G
became u nconscious and was b leed ing on the head. The 1 st Accused tr ied to
H wake LAW but the latter showed no response. The 1 st Accused said he intended H
to g o to the Mar ine P olice Base at Shu m Wan but he d id not as he became
I I
terr ified. Out of p anic, he said he continued to steer the b oat all the way
towards Lamma Is land. Later, the boat left Hong Kong waters and LAW showed
J J
no s ig n of life and his b od y b ecame cold . He said that he then r ealized that
K LAW had d ied and he pus hed the b od y into the sea b ecause he feared that the K
bod y mig ht b e d iscover ed b y the Pub lic Secur ity O fficers of the mainland
L shou ld they come to the area for patr ol. L
M M
The facts of Charge 2
N 3. Accord ing to the Summar y of Facts as agr eed b y the 2 nd Accused, N
PC 58873 (PW3) was tas ked to investigate the case. PW3 checked the call
O O
record of the mob ile p hone of LAW and he fou nd that 2 calls were made to
P LAW b y mob ile p hone number 69329878 at respectively 0143 and 0149 hours on P
nd
17.11.2007. This p hone nu mber was fou nd to b e subscr ibed b y the 2 Accused
Q on 11.9.2007 and it was later chang ed to another number 91480196 on Q
19.11.2007. PW3 later successfu lly contacted the 2 nd Accused b y calling
R R
91480196. In a subsequent inter view at her address, she told PW3 that s he had
subscribed the p hone number 69329878 in September 2007. Thereafter she
S S
received many nu isance p hone calls. S he then requested the p hone company to
T change the numb er in N ovemb er 2007. The 2 nd Accused said she had lost the T
relevant subscrip tion documents. She als o told PW3 that she d id not know LAW
U and s he had never heard ab out his name. U
V V
- 3 -
A A
B 4. On 15.4.2008, the 2 nd Accused was invited to g o to the p olice B
station and formally pr ovid e a w itness statement in which s he rep eated the
C above information to PW3. C
D D
5. Given the information pr ovid ed b y the 2 nd Accused, the p olice
E E
investigation into the d isappearance of LAW came to a standstill. It was only
later du e to the fres h evidence of KWOK Tai-shing (PW4) that the p olice knew
F F
that the mob ile p hone no. 69329878 was in fact used b y the 1 st Accused at the
G mater ial times the 1 st Accused was arrested. G
H H
nd
6. The p olice later als o arr ested the 2 Accused on 14.8.2008 f or
I “Mis lead ing the p olice b y pr ovid ing fals e infor mation ”. U nder verb al caution, I
she said s he was just help ing the 1 st Accus ed who taug ht her to say such things
J to the p olice. J
K K
7. Later in an inter view w ith DPC 45936 (PW6), the 2 nd Accused
L L
further admitted u nder caution that:
M 1) Althoug h the p hone N o. 69329878 was subscribed b y her, it was actually M
used b y the 1 st Accused thr oug hout, and she subscr ibed it for him at the
N request of her fr iend LO C hi-su n (LO); N
2) After s he received the p hone call fr om PW3 who enqu ired w ith her ab out
O O
st
the numb er, s he contacted LO and later s he met LO and the 1 Accused for
P dinner. She asked the 1 st Accused w hat happened to the p hone nu mber. The P
1 st Accused said nothing u ntoward happened. However he told her that s he
Q shou ld tell p olice that the number was exclusively b y her and s he had always Q
received nu is ance p hone calls and if the police s hou ld as k her anything on
R R
other matters, s he s hou ld say s he had no know ledg e;
S 3) LO als o told her that when she later gave a witness s tatement to the p olice, S
she s hou ld be flex ib le and just make up a false stor y.
T T
U U
V V
- 4 -
A A
Mitigation
B 8. The 1 st Accused has tw o previous records of “Possess ion of B
dang er ous drugs ” in 2005 for which he was only fined. He is aged 49 and was
C bor n in H ong K ong. He only received edu cation up to pr imar y 4 level. After C
leaving school, he w or ked as a fis her man and later became a construction
D D
wor ker between 1985 and 2002. After an industr ial incident, his waist was
E injured and he ceased w or king and has been relying on pub lic ass istance s ince E
2004. He is marr ied w ith tw o you ng daug hters now aged 7 and 12. Mr. CHEUNG
F submitted that his client only committed the offence ou t of fear and stup id ity F
and he als o urged the cour t to g ive cred it for the condu ct of the d efence as most
G G
of the pr osecution case was not challenged.
H H
9. The 2 nd Accused is 44 and has a clear record. She was b or n in the
I I
mainland and had only received pr imar y education ther e. She came to Hong
Kong w ith her family in 1979 and s he g ot marr ied in 1987 w ith 3 daug hters now
J J
aged 22, 17 and 13 respectively. Her husb and was engag ed in the wholesale of
K fis hes and she ass isted her husband ’s wor k. She later had a d ivorce with her K
husband in 2001 and s he star ted to cohab itate w ith a b oy fr iend and he
L supported her liv ing. Accord ing to the CSO report, s he told the Pr obation L
officer that she liked to g o to dr ink beer and chatted fr iends at nig ht in cooked
M M
food stall in Wanchai. It was dur ing those occas ions that s he came to know the
1 st Accused thr oug h a common fr i end LO. She just helped out her fr iend and
N N
involved in the tr oub le of the law. After s he was charged, s he separated w ith her
O boy fr iend and now wor ked as a waitr ess and lived w ith the eldest daug hter. Mr. O
Halley stressed the fact as he d id in the last hear ing that his client was first only
P charged w ith “M is lead ing the police b y provid ing false information ” (“the P
or ig inal offence ”) b y the p olice u nder s 64 of the Police For ce Ord inance, Cap.
Q Q
232. The max imu m sentence is a fine of $1,000 and an impr is onment f or 6
months only. The pr osecution only chose to charge his client for a more ser ious
R R
offence of “C onsp iracy to per ver t the cou rse of pub lic justice ” (“the present
S offence”) as the lesser offence was alread y time -b arred. He therefore urg ed me S
to cons id er this and submitted that the CSO, if imp osed, shou ld be of a shor ter
T duration than it was recommended w hich w as 140 to 200 hours. T
U U
V V
- 5 -
A A
Consideration
B 10. The real cause of death of LAW w ho has g one miss ing s ince B
17.11.2007 remains a mys ter y tod ay as the circumsta nces surr ou nd ing his death
C lie only in the mou th of the 1 st Accused when he gave an accou nt of how it C
happ ened in the cau tioned inter view after he was arrested some 9 months later.
D D
The accou nt g iven b y the 1 st Accused was ver y dub ious, to say the least. Ap art
E fr om saying he was terr ified, there was no good r eas on w hy the 1 st Accused d id E
not steer the b oat to the nearb y Mar ine P olice B ase at S hum Wan as he said he
F intended s o that emergency med ical ser vice cou ld be made availab le to LAW. F
The 1 st Accused stated that he later pus hed the b od y of LAW into sea as he
G G
feared that the dead b od y mig ht b e d iscovered b y the Pub lic Secur ity O fficer of
the mainland. If that was the case, it made no sense for him to steer away fr om
H H
Hong K ong waters towards the d irection of the mainland in the first p lace. The
I acts of the 1 st Accused str ong ly ind icated that he als o feared that the bod y I
wou ld be d is covered b y the H ong Kong P olice.
J J
K 11. That said, I accept that apar t fr om his ow n confession, ther e is no K
evidence before me to suggest that LAW’s death was as a r esu lt of any u nlaw fu l
L killing. This, however, is the gravamen of the offence because the pr evention of L
the law fu l bur ial of the corpse has the effect in reality of d enying the pr oper
M M
investigation b y the author ity into th e cause of the death of LAW in this case.
N N
12. Even pr oceed ing on the facts as d isclos ed b y the 1 st Accused as I
O O
am b ou nd to w hen sentencing him, an agg ravating factor for C harge 1 is that
P that there was no attempt b y him w ho was in charge of the b oat to steer the b oat P
to the p olice mar ine base or call for any med ical ass istance at once. If that had
Q been d one pr omptly, LAW mig ht have lived. Instead, he continued to steer the Q
boat away fr om Hong K ong waters and later when he said he fou nd LAW was
R R
dead alread y, he soug ht to cover up b y d is pos ing the b od y this way and he als o
soug ht to further cover up when he later taught the 2 nd Accused to tell lies to
S S
mis lead the p olice investigation. In this way, the 1 st Accused had clearly
T engaged in an exercise doing wha tever he could to ensure that such T
investiga tion as might ta ke pla ce in to the cause of the d eath of LAW wou ld be
U foiled. (see para.13 HKSAR v. LEUNG Sau -kuen CACC 54 /2003) U
V V
- 6 -
A A
B 13. The 1 st Accused was convicted after tr ial and had no sense of B
remorse. Based on the ab ove, I cons id er an appr opr iate sentence shou ld be an
C impr is onment for 3 years. I however red uce the sentence b y tw o months in C
recog nition of the condu ct of the d efence which saved the cour t ’s time in the
D D
tr ial. The sentence that I s hall imp os e on the 1 st Accused is therefore 34 months ’
E impr is onment. E
F F
14. What I said ab out C harge 1 in relation to the 1 st Accused wou ld
G have a b ear ing on the cons ider ation of the sentence in relation to the 2 nd G
Accused had it been the case that she knew a ll along what was going on and the
H 1 st Accused was cover ing up the fact that LAW ’s b od y was pushed b y him into H
the hig h seas. However, there is no evidence before me to suggest that s he has
I I
the know ledge.
J J
15. Further, the pr osecution als o conceded that the present offence
K K
which is far mor e ser ious is not the or ig inal offence that they have intended to
L
laid ag ainst the 2 nd Accused. That being the case, I accep t that the present L
recommendation in the CSO rep ort to per for m 140 -200 hours is on the hig h s id e,
M taking into accou nt the max imum sentence prescr ibed und er the or ig inal offence. M
As the 2 nd Accused is w illing to per form commu nity ser vice and based on the
N recommendation in the rep or t that she is a su itab le cand idate, I ord er her to N
perfor m a CSO of a lower duration of 80 hours accord ing ly.
O O
P P
(The effect of the breach of CSO was explained and the 2 nd Accused u nderstood
the leg al consequ ences)
Q Q
R R
(A. Kwok)
S S
Deputy D istr ict Judge
T T
U U
V V
A DCCC1209/2008 A
B IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE B
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
C C
CRIM INAL C ASE NO. 1209 OF 2008
D D
----------------------
E HKSAR E
v.
F NG Tai-s ing (1 st Accused) F
CHEUNG Ngai-kwan (2 nd Accused)
G G
----------------------
H H
Coram : Deputy D istr ict Judge A. Kwok
I Date: 14 t h September 2009 I
Present: Mr. Phillip ROSS, Counsel on F iat, for HKSAR/Director of
J Public Prosecution. J
Mr. Victor C.F. CHEUNG instru cted b y Messrs. Tony Kan & C o.
K K
assig ned b y D.L. A. for the 1 st Accused.
Mr. John HALLEY ins tructed b y Messrs. Georg e C han & C o
L L
nd
assig ned b y D.L. A. for the 2 Accused.
M Offences : (1) Preventing the law fu l bur ial of a corpse (阻 止 合 法 埋 葬 屍 體 ) M
(2) Consp ir acy to per ver t the course of pub lic justice (串 謀 妨 礙
N N
司法公正)
O O
--------------------------
P Reasons for Sentence P
--------------------------
Q Q
1. The 1 st Accused, NG Tai-s hing was convicted after tr ial of one
R R
cou nt of “ Preventing the lawfu l bur ial of a corpse” (C harge 1) and the 2 nd
Accused, CHEUNG Ngai- kwan was convicted on her own p lea of another cou nt
S S
“Consp ir acy to per ver t the course of pub lic justice” (C harg e 2). The mitigation
T and sentence of the 2 nd Accused was adjou rned u ntil the conclus ion of the tr ial T
of the 1 st Accused. In the meantime, I called for a C ommu nity Ser vice Order
U (“CSO”) Repor t and her b ail was ex tended. U
V V
- 2 -
A A
B The facts of Charge 1 B
C 2. The facts of C harge 1 have b een su fficiently d ealt w ith b y me in the C
Reasons for Verd ict and I d o not intend to fu lly rep eat here. Suffice it to say
D that after his arr est, the 1 st Accused freely admitted to the p olice in P13 u nder D
caution that at the mater ial times, LAW joined him and his 2 fr iends and they all
E E
board ed a motor ized sampan ( “the b oat”) to go to Ling D ing Is land for fu n. The
1 st Accused steered the b oat and LAW w as stand ing at the fr ont of the b oat
F F
when it suddenly collid ed w ith a floating bu oy near Ap Li C hau Br idge,
G Aberdeen and the impact caused Law to fall backwards onto the b oat. LAW then G
became u nconscious and was b leed ing on the head. The 1 st Accused tr ied to
H wake LAW but the latter showed no response. The 1 st Accused said he intended H
to g o to the Mar ine P olice Base at Shu m Wan but he d id not as he became
I I
terr ified. Out of p anic, he said he continued to steer the b oat all the way
towards Lamma Is land. Later, the boat left Hong Kong waters and LAW showed
J J
no s ig n of life and his b od y b ecame cold . He said that he then r ealized that
K LAW had d ied and he pus hed the b od y into the sea b ecause he feared that the K
bod y mig ht b e d iscover ed b y the Pub lic Secur ity O fficers of the mainland
L shou ld they come to the area for patr ol. L
M M
The facts of Charge 2
N 3. Accord ing to the Summar y of Facts as agr eed b y the 2 nd Accused, N
PC 58873 (PW3) was tas ked to investigate the case. PW3 checked the call
O O
record of the mob ile p hone of LAW and he fou nd that 2 calls were made to
P LAW b y mob ile p hone number 69329878 at respectively 0143 and 0149 hours on P
nd
17.11.2007. This p hone nu mber was fou nd to b e subscr ibed b y the 2 Accused
Q on 11.9.2007 and it was later chang ed to another number 91480196 on Q
19.11.2007. PW3 later successfu lly contacted the 2 nd Accused b y calling
R R
91480196. In a subsequent inter view at her address, she told PW3 that s he had
subscribed the p hone number 69329878 in September 2007. Thereafter she
S S
received many nu isance p hone calls. S he then requested the p hone company to
T change the numb er in N ovemb er 2007. The 2 nd Accused said she had lost the T
relevant subscrip tion documents. She als o told PW3 that she d id not know LAW
U and s he had never heard ab out his name. U
V V
- 3 -
A A
B 4. On 15.4.2008, the 2 nd Accused was invited to g o to the p olice B
station and formally pr ovid e a w itness statement in which s he rep eated the
C above information to PW3. C
D D
5. Given the information pr ovid ed b y the 2 nd Accused, the p olice
E E
investigation into the d isappearance of LAW came to a standstill. It was only
later du e to the fres h evidence of KWOK Tai-shing (PW4) that the p olice knew
F F
that the mob ile p hone no. 69329878 was in fact used b y the 1 st Accused at the
G mater ial times the 1 st Accused was arrested. G
H H
nd
6. The p olice later als o arr ested the 2 Accused on 14.8.2008 f or
I “Mis lead ing the p olice b y pr ovid ing fals e infor mation ”. U nder verb al caution, I
she said s he was just help ing the 1 st Accus ed who taug ht her to say such things
J to the p olice. J
K K
7. Later in an inter view w ith DPC 45936 (PW6), the 2 nd Accused
L L
further admitted u nder caution that:
M 1) Althoug h the p hone N o. 69329878 was subscribed b y her, it was actually M
used b y the 1 st Accused thr oug hout, and she subscr ibed it for him at the
N request of her fr iend LO C hi-su n (LO); N
2) After s he received the p hone call fr om PW3 who enqu ired w ith her ab out
O O
st
the numb er, s he contacted LO and later s he met LO and the 1 Accused for
P dinner. She asked the 1 st Accused w hat happened to the p hone nu mber. The P
1 st Accused said nothing u ntoward happened. However he told her that s he
Q shou ld tell p olice that the number was exclusively b y her and s he had always Q
received nu is ance p hone calls and if the police s hou ld as k her anything on
R R
other matters, s he s hou ld say s he had no know ledg e;
S 3) LO als o told her that when she later gave a witness s tatement to the p olice, S
she s hou ld be flex ib le and just make up a false stor y.
T T
U U
V V
- 4 -
A A
Mitigation
B 8. The 1 st Accused has tw o previous records of “Possess ion of B
dang er ous drugs ” in 2005 for which he was only fined. He is aged 49 and was
C bor n in H ong K ong. He only received edu cation up to pr imar y 4 level. After C
leaving school, he w or ked as a fis her man and later became a construction
D D
wor ker between 1985 and 2002. After an industr ial incident, his waist was
E injured and he ceased w or king and has been relying on pub lic ass istance s ince E
2004. He is marr ied w ith tw o you ng daug hters now aged 7 and 12. Mr. CHEUNG
F submitted that his client only committed the offence ou t of fear and stup id ity F
and he als o urged the cour t to g ive cred it for the condu ct of the d efence as most
G G
of the pr osecution case was not challenged.
H H
9. The 2 nd Accused is 44 and has a clear record. She was b or n in the
I I
mainland and had only received pr imar y education ther e. She came to Hong
Kong w ith her family in 1979 and s he g ot marr ied in 1987 w ith 3 daug hters now
J J
aged 22, 17 and 13 respectively. Her husb and was engag ed in the wholesale of
K fis hes and she ass isted her husband ’s wor k. She later had a d ivorce with her K
husband in 2001 and s he star ted to cohab itate w ith a b oy fr iend and he
L supported her liv ing. Accord ing to the CSO report, s he told the Pr obation L
officer that she liked to g o to dr ink beer and chatted fr iends at nig ht in cooked
M M
food stall in Wanchai. It was dur ing those occas ions that s he came to know the
1 st Accused thr oug h a common fr i end LO. She just helped out her fr iend and
N N
involved in the tr oub le of the law. After s he was charged, s he separated w ith her
O boy fr iend and now wor ked as a waitr ess and lived w ith the eldest daug hter. Mr. O
Halley stressed the fact as he d id in the last hear ing that his client was first only
P charged w ith “M is lead ing the police b y provid ing false information ” (“the P
or ig inal offence ”) b y the p olice u nder s 64 of the Police For ce Ord inance, Cap.
Q Q
232. The max imu m sentence is a fine of $1,000 and an impr is onment f or 6
months only. The pr osecution only chose to charge his client for a more ser ious
R R
offence of “C onsp iracy to per ver t the cou rse of pub lic justice ” (“the present
S offence”) as the lesser offence was alread y time -b arred. He therefore urg ed me S
to cons id er this and submitted that the CSO, if imp osed, shou ld be of a shor ter
T duration than it was recommended w hich w as 140 to 200 hours. T
U U
V V
- 5 -
A A
Consideration
B 10. The real cause of death of LAW w ho has g one miss ing s ince B
17.11.2007 remains a mys ter y tod ay as the circumsta nces surr ou nd ing his death
C lie only in the mou th of the 1 st Accused when he gave an accou nt of how it C
happ ened in the cau tioned inter view after he was arrested some 9 months later.
D D
The accou nt g iven b y the 1 st Accused was ver y dub ious, to say the least. Ap art
E fr om saying he was terr ified, there was no good r eas on w hy the 1 st Accused d id E
not steer the b oat to the nearb y Mar ine P olice B ase at S hum Wan as he said he
F intended s o that emergency med ical ser vice cou ld be made availab le to LAW. F
The 1 st Accused stated that he later pus hed the b od y of LAW into sea as he
G G
feared that the dead b od y mig ht b e d iscovered b y the Pub lic Secur ity O fficer of
the mainland. If that was the case, it made no sense for him to steer away fr om
H H
Hong K ong waters towards the d irection of the mainland in the first p lace. The
I acts of the 1 st Accused str ong ly ind icated that he als o feared that the bod y I
wou ld be d is covered b y the H ong Kong P olice.
J J
K 11. That said, I accept that apar t fr om his ow n confession, ther e is no K
evidence before me to suggest that LAW’s death was as a r esu lt of any u nlaw fu l
L killing. This, however, is the gravamen of the offence because the pr evention of L
the law fu l bur ial of the corpse has the effect in reality of d enying the pr oper
M M
investigation b y the author ity into th e cause of the death of LAW in this case.
N N
12. Even pr oceed ing on the facts as d isclos ed b y the 1 st Accused as I
O O
am b ou nd to w hen sentencing him, an agg ravating factor for C harge 1 is that
P that there was no attempt b y him w ho was in charge of the b oat to steer the b oat P
to the p olice mar ine base or call for any med ical ass istance at once. If that had
Q been d one pr omptly, LAW mig ht have lived. Instead, he continued to steer the Q
boat away fr om Hong K ong waters and later when he said he fou nd LAW was
R R
dead alread y, he soug ht to cover up b y d is pos ing the b od y this way and he als o
soug ht to further cover up when he later taught the 2 nd Accused to tell lies to
S S
mis lead the p olice investigation. In this way, the 1 st Accused had clearly
T engaged in an exercise doing wha tever he could to ensure that such T
investiga tion as might ta ke pla ce in to the cause of the d eath of LAW wou ld be
U foiled. (see para.13 HKSAR v. LEUNG Sau -kuen CACC 54 /2003) U
V V
- 6 -
A A
B 13. The 1 st Accused was convicted after tr ial and had no sense of B
remorse. Based on the ab ove, I cons id er an appr opr iate sentence shou ld be an
C impr is onment for 3 years. I however red uce the sentence b y tw o months in C
recog nition of the condu ct of the d efence which saved the cour t ’s time in the
D D
tr ial. The sentence that I s hall imp os e on the 1 st Accused is therefore 34 months ’
E impr is onment. E
F F
14. What I said ab out C harge 1 in relation to the 1 st Accused wou ld
G have a b ear ing on the cons ider ation of the sentence in relation to the 2 nd G
Accused had it been the case that she knew a ll along what was going on and the
H 1 st Accused was cover ing up the fact that LAW ’s b od y was pushed b y him into H
the hig h seas. However, there is no evidence before me to suggest that s he has
I I
the know ledge.
J J
15. Further, the pr osecution als o conceded that the present offence
K K
which is far mor e ser ious is not the or ig inal offence that they have intended to
L
laid ag ainst the 2 nd Accused. That being the case, I accep t that the present L
recommendation in the CSO rep ort to per for m 140 -200 hours is on the hig h s id e,
M taking into accou nt the max imum sentence prescr ibed und er the or ig inal offence. M
As the 2 nd Accused is w illing to per form commu nity ser vice and based on the
N recommendation in the rep or t that she is a su itab le cand idate, I ord er her to N
perfor m a CSO of a lower duration of 80 hours accord ing ly.
O O
P P
(The effect of the breach of CSO was explained and the 2 nd Accused u nderstood
the leg al consequ ences)
Q Q
R R
(A. Kwok)
S S
Deputy D istr ict Judge
T T
U U
V V