WONG NANG HANG v. THE QUEEN
HTML content
CACC000340/1971
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 340 OF 1971
-----------------
| BETWEEN | ||
| WONG NANG HANG | Appellant | |
| and | ||
| THE QUEEN | Respondent |
-----------------
Coram: Huggins, J.
Date of Judgment: 14th July, 1971.
-----------------
JUDGMENT
-----------------
1. The Appellant along with two other young men pleaded guilty before the Juvenile Court Magistrate on three charges of robbery. This Appellant was sentenced to detention in a Training Centre. Although his age is given on the Charge Sheet as fifteen years, I am told that he is in fact sixteen.
2. This is in some respect an unfortunate case because the Probation Officer's report suggests that the older members of his family are too busy carning money to pay much attention to the younger members. The offences were committed by these three boys together with another and in each case they robbed other young people, but only one of the offences was reported to the police. It was as a result of that report that the arrests were made. The other two offences were admitted by the Appellant but the victims have not been identified.
3. The learned Magistrate was able to order probation or continued probation in respect of the other two defendants in the case but, after what was obviously very careful and anxious consideration, she felt unable to take the same course in relation to the Appellant. He had been convicted in 1968 on two charges of simple larceny and his mother had, on that occasion, been required to enter into a bond for his good behaviour. However, as I say, the Appellant appears to have received little, if any assistance from his family and he has got into bad company. The learned Magistrate had before her not only the original Probation Officer's report but a further Probation Officer's report and she also had a report from the Begonia Road Boy's Home and a medical report. The character reports indicated an attitude of aggressiveness though he has responded to authority in an institution.
4. Having regard to the complete lack of co-operation from the family and to the Appellant's own attitude I think the learned Magistrate was entirely right in coming to the conclusion that it would be a waste of time to continue probation and that what was required was a period of detention in an institution where he could receive discipline. The appeal is dismissed.
14th July, 1971.
Representation: