LI CHUN-SAI AND OTHERS v. THE QUEEN

CACC000532/1976

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL	1976 No.532
on appeal from the High Court	(Criminal)

  

  

BETWEEN:
	LI Chun-sai	Appellants
	KWOK Wai-hung
	LEUNG Kam-wah
	TSUI Mei-lam
	LIU Chung-kwan
	and
	THE QUEEN	Respondent

Coram: Briggs, C.J., Huggins & Pickering, JJ.A.

Date of Judgment: 17th December, 1976.

  

-----------------

JUDGMENT

-----------------

  

1. The five appellants all appealed against various sentences passed on them for the offences of rape and unlawful detention of females. In addition, the fourth appellant appealed against his conviction.

2. We dismissed the appeal of the fourth appellant against conviction and the appeals of the fourth and fifth appellants against the sentences passed on them.

3. This judgment only deals with the first three appellants.

4. At the trial, the first three appellants pleaded not guilty to the offences with which they were charged. However, half way through the trial they reversed this plea and all pleaded guilty to various offences. The first appellant pleaded guilty to three separate charges of rape which involved two girls and the second and third appellants each pleaded guilty to one offence of rape involving one girl and all three appellants pleaded guilty to one offence of unlawful detention of females.

5. The first appellant was sentenced to nine years' imprisonment for each of the three rapes with which he was charged. The second and third appellants were sentenced to eight years' imprisonment in respect of the single charge of rape with which each of them was charged. And, in addition, each of the three appellants was sentenced to two years' imprisonment on the unlawful detention of females charge. The latter sentence was ordered to be concurrent with the sentences passed on the rape charges.

6. In the event, therefore, the first appellant was sentenced to nine years' imprisonment and the second and third appellants to eight years' imprisonment.

7. It is unnecessary to set out the facts of the case in any detail. It is enough to say that these five appellants, together with others, detained four girls against their will. These girls were raped by one or more of the appellants. They were detained and ordered by the appellants to work in brothels in unseemly circumstances.

8. We think that the individual sentences passed for the individual rapes in this case are correct sentences. However, we note that the first appellant at the time of the offence was aged 17 years and 8 months. The second appellant was aged 19 and the third appellant was aged 18 years and 7 months. The appellants had clear records. In view of the age of these three young men, and for no other reason, we think it proper to reduce their sentences by two years in each case. It follows that the first appellant will serve seven years instead of nine years' imprisonment, and the second and third appellants will serve six years' imprisonment instead of eight years.

9. The fourth appellant was sentenced to eight years' imprisonment on one charge of rape and the fifth appellant was sentenced to ten years' imprisonment on each of the three charges of rape. The fourth appellant is aged 26 and the fifth appellant is aged 27. We think that their sentences were proper sentences and, as we already said, we do not intend to interfere with them.

  

  

	(Geoffrey Briggs)
	President.

  

Representation:

Kevin Shuen (D.L.A.) for 1st, 2nd, 3rd, & 4th Appellants.

5th Appellant in person.

E. Soh for the Crown/Respondent.