|
DCCC840/2010
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 840 OF 2010
----------------------
| |
HKSAR |
|
| |
v. |
|
| |
Heung Chi-kwan (D2) |
|
| ---------------------- |
| Date: |
29 December 2010 at 10.04 am |
| Present: |
Mr Alvin Chui, PP, of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Mr Augustine Tong, of Augustine C Y Tong & Co., assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the 2nd Defendant |
| Offence: |
Burglary (入屋犯法罪) |
---------------------
Reasons for Sentence
---------------------
1. The defendant has been convicted on his own plea of a charge of burglary. The charge was committed together with a 12-year-old youth. It was committed on 22 May this year at premises which are part of the Hong Kong Jockey Club Staff Quarters in Shatin.
2. The facts admitted by the defendant disclose that the two victims, Mr and Mrs Tang, live at the Staff Quarters and they are related to the 1st defendant. At the Staff Quarters they kept a safe and inside the safe was ¥500 renminbi, $2,000 Malaysian Ringgits, four watches, two gold medals and a bank book.
3. At 3.15 on the day of the offence, the 1st defendant arrived at the premises. The only person at the premises there was the first prosecution witness, Mr Tang. The 1st defendant invited Mr Tang to go out together and visit a friend of the 1st defendant. This was agreed to and the door of the premises was left closed but not locked.
4. At 3.30, PW1 returned to the premises and found that the safe was stolen. At about 4.00 pm PW2 returned and the matter was reported to the police.
5. On 1 June the 1st defendant surrendered to the police with his father and admitted that he and the 2nd defendant had stolen the safe from the premises.
6. In a subsequent recorded interview, the 1st defendant admitted that he had informed the 2nd defendant about the location of the safe. He then led the first witness out of the premises and left the door unlocked. The 2nd defendant was hiding at the rear of the staircase and entered the premises, stole the safe after the 1st defendant led the first victim out of the premises.
7. The 2nd defendant also admitted his role in this matter.
8. CCTV images were captured of the 1st defendant and PW1 entering the elevator and D2 carrying the safe into the elevator subsequently.
9. When D2 was arrested and cautioned, he admitted that he and the 1st defendant stole the safe. He said that he opened the safe with a hammer. He exchanged all the foreign currency into Hong Kong currency and spent the money. He sold one of the watches and a gold medal and spent that money as well. He then later discarded the safe and the rest of the contents. He did not share the proceeds with the 1st defendant.
10. The defendant has two previous convictions. In July 2009 he was placed on probation for an offence of assault and two months later for theft. The probation order was discharged and he was ordered to go to a rehabilitation centre.
11. On the last occasion I adjourned the case for the Commissioner for Correctional Services to prepare a report on the suitability of this defendant for detention in a training centre. The report says that the defendant is mentally and physically fit for detention in a training centre and that there is a place available for him. The Commissioner also considers the defendant suitable for such training.
12. Defence counsel has described the defendant as being immature, impulsive and greedy. However, there was nothing impulsive about the offence which the defendant has pleaded guilt to. It was a domestic burglary, he had hatched the plan with a 12-year-old youth and subsequently disposed of the contents of the safe.
13. The defendant, who was 16 at the time, was described as coming from a working class family, ranking second among four siblings. He says that his father was wrapped up by work and his mother was weak in parenting supervision over the defendant.
14. According to school reports, the defendant obtained satisfactory academic performance throughout his primary education but experienced serious adjustment problems when he got to secondary school. He started to become rebellious and mix with dubious peers. Arrangements were made for him to study at boarding school.
15. He became involved in the assault case in 2009, and whilst on bail for that he committed the offence of theft. He was placed on probation and during the initial period of probation managed to behave himself, he attended school, but his performance was not satisfactory. He again went back to his dubious peers and failed to turn up at court for review of his progress. He was subsequently arrested by the police and ordered to go to the rehabilitation centre.
16. Given the background of the defendant, it seems to me that the training centre is the appropriate sentence and I make an order that he be detained in a training centre.
|