HKSAR v. EDWIN CHONG MUN JYN

DCCC 231/2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 231 OF 2013

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1. Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to four offences of using a false instrument and to one offence of possessing a false instrument, contrary to sections 73 and 75(1) respectively of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap.200. You admitted the brief facts an I convicted you.

2. The facts were as follows.  You are a Malaysian.  You came to Hong Kong from Shenzhen on 1 December 2012.  On that very day the offences took place.

Charge 1

3. At about 2030 hours on that day you purchased two mobile phones valued at $10,996 from Fortress at Melbourne Plaza, Queen’s Road, Central.  You handed over an American Express card in the name of Edwin Chong for payment.  That is Card 1.  The transaction was successful.

Charge 2

4. At about 2225 hours that day you purchased a suitcase valued at $1,500 from SOGO, East Point Centre, Hennessy Road.  You handed over the same card as previously for payment.  The transaction was successful.

Charges 3 and 4

5. At about 2230 hours you purchased two bags valued at $13,800 from the same branch of SOGO using the same American Express card.  The transaction failed.  The card was handed back to you, that is Charge 3.  You then handed over another American Express card in the same name to the assistant.  The assistant, suspecting it to be false, asked the cashier to check with the card centre.  The card centre confirmed it to be false and the police were called - Charge 4.

Charge 5

6. The police arrested you and found in your possession the first American Express card and another American Express card in the same name; that is Edwin Chong.  This is the third card.  You were arrested and cautioned. 

7. In a video recorded interview under caution you made the following admissions:

(1) That you met unknown male in Malaysia. You then went to Shenzhen with this male, where you met another male who gave you three credit cards.

(2) You were given $1,000 a week for making purchases with the three cards. The purchases were to be handed over to the second unknown male.

(3) For Charge 1, you used the first card and handed the two mobile phones to the unknown male.

(4) You used the same card for Charge 2 and handed over the suitcase to the male.

(5) For the 3rd and 4th charges, you used the first and second cards, which failed.

8. American Express confirmed that the cards 1 to 3 were issued in the USA.  Forensic examination confirmed them to be false.

9. You knew or believed them to be false.

10. You are a person of clear record in Hong Kong. 

11. I was referred to the case of HKSAR v Tu I Lang, CACC 464/2006.  That set a basic tariff of 3 years’ imprisonment as a starting point.

12. On your behalf Mr Cheng entered mitigation.  He told me that you are 25 years of age, Malaysian, single, and college educated. Your father is confined to a mental home in Malaysia and is wheelchair-bound after suffering two strokes.  Your mother is aged about 45 and lives separately in England.  Your parents divorced some 10 years’ ago.  You went to college in Ireland, where you worked in McDonald’s to support yourself whilst studying.  I accept this must have been very hard for you.  After college you obtained work in Ireland as a trainee department store manager but returned to Malaysia to look after your father who had suffered a stroke in 2009.  When the position of your father stabilised you returned back to Ireland, where, as I understand it, you obtained work in a kitchen.  However, your father suffered a second stroke and you returned to look after him.  Your father then unfortunately developed mental illness and was confined to a hospital.  All this, quite understandably, caused you stress and worry.

13. Mr Cheng said the stress and greed led to the commission of these offences.  You got to know some bad people, you were handed three false cards, two of which you used, and you only obtained about $12,500 worth of goods.  You failed to get the two bags which cost $13,800.

14. Mr Cheng stressed that you were of clear record, that you had pleaded guilty, and relatively youthful.  He said the crimes were unsophisticated and the organisation limited.  He asked me for leniency on your behalf.

15. I turn now to the sentence.

16. I note the authority provided.  The offences, I accept, were unsophisticated.  There was but limited amount of organisation and the amount of goods obtained was small.  There was, however, in this case an international dimension in that you are from another country, that is Malaysia, and also the credit cards themselves were registered in America.  This is obviously an aggravating feature. 

17. I took into account all aspects of the mitigation including your youth, your clear record and your plea of guilty.

18. To put it simply, I took as a starting point 3 years’ imprisonment on each offence.  This is reduced to 2 years for your plea of guilty.  You will go to prison for 2 years on each offence, all to be served concurrently because this is one course of conduct.  Therefore you will go to prison for 2 years.