HKSAR v. HA KIN MAN

DCCC615/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 615 OF 2012

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Defendant, you pleaded guilty to a single offence of theft, contrary to section 9 of Theft Ordinance, Cap. 210. That was a special category of theft; that was theft by pickpocket. You admitted the facts and I convicted you. Briefly what happened is as follows.

2.  At around 4.15 pm on 15 June of this year near the junction of Canton Road and Fife Street Mongkok, senior police constable 47586, PW1, saw you acting suspiciously.  PW1 saw you follow a lady, PW2, Lo Lin-mui, a female.  She had a bag on her left shoulder.  When you were about two metres from her you stretched out your right-hand into the bag and took out her purse.  PW1 intercepted you and took the purse from your right-hand.

3.  PW2 confirmed that the purse was hers.  PC11323 arrested and cautioned you and you said, “Ah Sir I stole the woman’s purse out of greed, give me a chance.  The purse and contents were returned to PW2.  The purse contained PW2’s ID card, a home visit permit, an Octopus card, a Park N Shop money back card, two gift coupons worth in total $100 and $2,059.40.  You admitted to 18 previous convictions, 14 of which involved crimes of dishonesty and were, therefore, similar.  It appears from the antecedent statement that six of them relate to theft by pick pocketing. 

4.  On your behalf Mr Lam entered mitigation.  He submitted the usual starting point to be some 12 to 15 months’ imprisonment. He told that in 1979 you came to Hong Kong from the Mainland and you were educated to P6.  You are divorced with a daughter of 22 and an aged mother in the Mainland.  You are in receipt of public assistance of some $3,000 per month.  He also told me that you had been treated at Kwai Chung Mental Health Clinic for the past 10 years and that during your remand you have served that at Siu Lam.  You committed the present offence out of greed and lack of money.

5.  In respect to the offence itself Mr Lam submitted that you acted alone, there was no tool or weapon used and the whole offence was rather unsophisticated.  He also reminded me that you had pleaded guilty at the first available opportunity.

6.  I turn now to the sentence.  You have, in fact, a very poor criminal record especially in relation to crimes of dishonesty.  I have already made reference to this but there are 14 previous convictions for crimes of dishonesty, six of which relate to pick-pocketing.  You are, therefore, a persistent offender.  In your favour I do accept that the offence itself was rather unsophisticated in the execution; that you acted alone and without tools.  Also, upon arrest and caution you were entirely straightforward and cooperative.  I do note that the location was a busy shopping area. 

7.  As I said I do regard you as a persistent offender and it takes you out of the normal run of the mill sentencing tariff. I had considered asking for a report as to your mental condition but it is clear that it must be serious and profound as you have been lodged at Siu Lam in the meantime.  That too has to be taken into consideration.  I note on the last occasion you received 16 months’ imprisonment but of course this court is not bound by that.

8.  Taking all matters into consideration I take a starting point of 18 months reduced to 12 months for your plea of guilty and you will go to prison for 12 months.