|
DCCC1012/2009
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1012 OF 2009
----------------------
----------------------
|
Date:
|
18 February 2010 at 10.22 am
|
|
Present:
|
Mr Derek Wong, PP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Ms Lee Shin-man, Cindy, instructed by Francis Kong & Co., assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Defendant
|
|
Offence:
|
Burglary (入屋犯法罪)
|
---------------------
Reasons for Sentence
---------------------
1. I convicted the defendant after trial of a charge of burglary. The particulars of the offence are that on 19 November 2007, he entered the Hong Kong Bowling Alley which is in Kowloon Bay and stole therein various items of property and cash worth $961,800. At the outset of the trial, the defendant indicated that he was prepared to plead guilty to handling some of the properties stolen in the burglary, but that was not accepted by the prosecution.
2. The defendant had worked at the burgled premises from November 2006 when the bowling alley opened until September 2007. He had worked for the operators of that bowling alley since 2000. The bowling alley was entered in the early hours of the morning of 19 November. The burglary was not discovered until lunchtime of 19 November. A cashier working in the reception area noticed that there was money missing from her drawer but was not sure how much until the boss came later that morning.
3. That manager called one of the owners of the premises and he came and discovered that not only was money stolen from there but money was stolen from two of the safes inside the premises. The first safe from which property was stolen was a safe which the manager was in control of and that was in the general office. The general office led to a boardroom, and inside the boardroom was a cubicle in which there was another safe from which property had been stolen. That safe was in a cubicle which was occupied by the proprietor of the premises, a Mr Yeung Ka‑shu who was 69 years of age. I will refer to him as PW1.
4. When the cubicle was inspected, it was found that a folder, which was kept in a filing drawer in a desk in that room, had been taken out and put on top of the desk, and this folder was a folder which had the keys to the safes of the combination locks.
5. Forensic examination of that folder revealed that the defendant’s fingerprints were on the folder. A Breguet watch stolen from the safe was pawned by the defendant in a Macau pawnshop on 18 June 2008.
6. Immigration records show that the defendant was in Hong Kong at the time of the burglary. When the defendant was arrested, he admitted that he had pawned the Breguet watch and also a number of other items stolen from the burglary. He said he had been given these items to pawn whilst he was in Macau, and he had been given them by a person called Hui Ka-wah whom he had met whilst he was working at the burgled premises.
7. The defendant has a clear record. I was told in mitigation that he is aged 29, he is married and he married in 2005. At that time, his wife was living in the mainland and only recently joined him in Hong Kong in 2009. They have a 4‑and-a-half-year-old son. He studies in a kindergarten in Hong Kong. His wife, who is 28, has recently obtained employment as a saleslady, and I am told that from that she earns some $7,000 per month.
8. At the time of his arrest, the defendant was employed by a firm called Wan Fung and was earning $10,000 a month. He has a mother aged 62 and a father who is 70-odd years of age who suffers from dementia and other health problems.
9. Placed before the court have been four letters, one from the defendant’s wife, one from the mother, one from a District Councillor and one from his current employer. The letter from the defendant’s wife describes the defendant as being a very responsible family man. She describes him as being the main breadwinner of the family who has shouldered all the burden of the family. She describes him as being a fatherly figure and a good husband. And before she came to Hong Kong, he looked after the son.
10. The mother describes her son as being a responsible son and has shouldered much of the financial burdens of the family.
11. The letter from the District Councillor states that he knows the whole family and is aware that the father has suffered from dementia and other health problems. He describes the defendant as being a responsible person and financially and spiritually supporting the family.
12. The defendant after leaving the bowling alley found employment with a firm called Wan Fung, and a Mr Choi from that company has also sent in a letter describing the defendant as being a diligent and having a serious working attitude. He said he has a good working relationship with colleagues and has worked industriously since working with his company.
13. The offence of which the defendant is convicted is a serious offence. It is an entry into non-domestic premises in the middle of the night. The amount of property stolen is substantial, worth nearly $1 million. The only item recovered was a Breguet watch, but that had been pawned. The defendant was a former employee of the company and so knew the inside of the premises.
14. The normal sentence for an offence of this kind is 2 and a half years’ imprisonment. I am aware that the defendant has a clear record, but it seems to me that this is far more serious than the average non-domestic burglary that comes before these courts. I have been asked to consider his family circumstances, his son is going to be deprived of his father for a number of years, and the family will suffer greatly from any period of incarceration.
15. Having weighed up all the various features of the case, I have decided that the appropriate sentence will be one of 3 years’ imprisonment.
|