HKSAR v. LAU TAK FAI

DCCC217/2011

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 217 OF 2011

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to 5 charges, 4 of which, Charges 1 to 4, are offences of using a false instrument contrary to section 73 of the Crimes Ordinance Cap.200, and the 5th charge, an offence of possessing a false instrument contrary to section 75(1) of the Crimes Ordinance.

2.  All of the offences took place on the same day - that is, 1 June last year - on which date in the afternoon you went to the Ming Shing Jewellery Company in Tai Po Plaza and attempted to use the forged credit card the subject matter of Charge 1 to purchase a gold necklace for $13,480. When this was unsuccessful you boldly produced a second forged card, the subject matter of Charge 2, to make the purchase, which this time was successful. 

3.  Regarding Charges 3, 4 and 5 you then left the shop but returned 10 minutes later and attempted to purchase a pair of earrings for $8,000, again by use of a forged credit card.  The initial attempt was unsuccessful and you requested the salesgirl to halve the payment to $4,000 on the card which was duly done.  However, when the process was repeated in order to complete the purchase the transaction was unsuccessful.  You then took out the second card for payment of the outstanding $4,000 and at the same time took out a third forged card without using it.  The staff member of the shop then became suspicious and after she telephoned the Citibank she discovered that no transaction had gone through for the first $4,000.  You then fled the premises but were subsequently intercepted by security staff. 

4.  You are now only 26 years of age and despite your relative youth have a string of previous convictions for very serious offences including robbery, blackmail and trafficking in dangerous drugs.  Credit card fraud such as the present offences are serious offences due to the potential for loss that can be suffered.  They are prevalent in Hong Kong and deterrent sentences must be passed.  I accept that the present offences come at the lower end of the scale because there is no international element present and the operation that you were involved in appears to be extremely small and unsophisticated.

5.  Taking everything into account I adopt a starting point of 3 years’ imprisonment in relation to each of the Charges 1 to 5.  However, due to your appalling criminal record, which I consider to be an aggravating feature, I will increase this starting point by 6 months to one of 3 years and 6 months’ imprisonment.

6.  I will discount this by one-third to reflect your plea of guilty, which is the only mitigating factor, coming to a sentence of 28 months’ imprisonment on each charge.

7.  Due to the question of totality of sentence, I order these sentences to run concurrently with each other.