HKSAR v. LI SIU WAH

DCCC 129/2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 129 OF 2013

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  The defendant has pleaded guilty to three charges of domestic burglary.

2.  The facts admitted by the defendant are that in respect of the first burglary, which was committed in August 2012, the victim in that case is a lady who is now deceased and was about 90 at the material time.  She resided alone at a room on the 7th floor of a property in Kam Lam Street in Mongkok.  Due to her old age, she had difficulty in movement.

3.  On the day of the offence at 8 o’clock in the morning she went to the market.  The defendant struck up a conversation with her, pretending to be an acquaintance of hers.  He also assisted by carrying her groceries.

4.  At 11.30, the defendant followed Madam Ang to her premises.  When she had opened the door and the gate, once inside, he pushed her onto a wooden bench then rummaged in her pockets.  He stole from her an amount of cash, an Identity Card and a Senior Citizen card.

5.  As a result of the force applied to her, the side seam of the left pocket of her inner garment was torn apart.

6.  The defendant fled at once and Madam Ang went downstairs to seek help from the caretaker, and a report was made to the police.

7.  CCTV footage of the building captured images of a male resembling the defendant.

8.  The victim sustained no injures.

9.  The second burglary was committed three days later.  The victim in this case is an 82-year-old gentleman called Mr Ng. He lives in a room in Mei Yu House in the Shek Kip Mei Estate.

10.  On the day of the offence at about 3.30 in the afternoon he went shopping, and at 4 o’clock he was accosted by the defendant outside the Shek Kip Mei Market.  The defendant inquired about the victim’s living environment and indicated that he would like to visit his home. Trusting his words, the victim took the defendant to his home, and once inside, the defendant asked the victim to give him his passbook and he would assist him to move to a larger public housing unit. 

11.  The victim handed over his passbook and immediately the defendant left with it, stating that he would help him process the application.  The victim at that stage recalled that there were seven banknotes with the bank passbook, but the money had gone missing.

12.  A report was made to the police and it was confirmed that the bank passbook had not been used.

13.  Again, CCTV footage of the building was inspected and that revealed images of the defendant taking the lift together with the second victim.

14.  The third charge, the victim there is an 81-year-old gentleman called Mr Choy, who is a retired merchandiser.  He resides with his domestic helper at Flat 401, Lai Wing House, Lai On Estate, Shamshuipo.

15.  He met the defendant the first time on 10 September 2012 at the clinic of a bone-setter in Pei Ho Street.

16.  On 22 September, the victim’s helper was on leave.  At about 2 pm when Mr Choy was walking past the junction of Tai Nam Street and Ki Lung Street, he came upon the defendant again, and the defendant indicated that he would like to conduct a body check on Mr Choy.  Mr Choy ignored the defendant but the defendant kept following Mr Choy until he arrived at his residence at about 2.15 pm. 

17.  Feeling unable to turn him down any more and thinking that he genuinely intended to perform a body check on him, the victim let the defendant into his premises.  Once inside, Mr Choy placed his wallet containing his Senior Citizen Card and about $6,000 in cash inside an unlocked drawer underneath his bed.

18.  The defendant instructed Mr Choy to lie on the bed, and whilst he was lying supine on the bed Mr Choy kept his eyes on the ceiling while the defendant claimed that he was performing a body check on him, pressing all over his body at the bedside.  After 5 minutes, the defendant told Mr Choy he was in good health and then left.

19.  After he had gone, Mr Choy checked the drawer underneath his bed and discovered his wallet was missing.

20.  The defendant was arrested on 4 December at Shamshuipo Police Station where he was in custody for another matter.  He was questioned about these offences and admitted that all three had been committed by him.

21.  In relation to the first charge, he admitted that he had pretended to be an acquaintance of Madam Ng and she invited him to her home.  According to the defendant, she then placed her wallet on the side table and he asked her to make tea in order to distract her attention.  He then took away her wallet and left and spent the money on gambling and discarded the rest of the items.

22.  In relation to the second charge, he agreed that he met the victim in that case outside the market and, after chatting, went to his home.  The defendant claimed that he saw a bag hanging on the bed, and taking the chance of the victim going to the toilet, he rummaged the bag, found the passbook inserted with $3,500, which he stole together with the passbook. He said he spent the money on horse betting and discarded the bank passbook.

23.  As regards the third offence, he said that the victim invited him in to have a chat at his home, and when taking a rest, he took the wallet from a drawer and left.  The defendant said there were 5 to 6,000 dollars inside the wallet which he spent on repaying loan sharks and he discarded the wallet.

24.  The defendant has an appalling record.  He has been before the court on 39 previous occasions for 63 offences, 24 of which were theft-related. 

25.  In November 2008, the defendant appeared before the court in respect of three charges of robbery and one charge of theft.  In respect of those offences, he was sentenced to a total of 5 years’ imprisonment and was released from prison in March 2012.  The victims of all those offences involved elderly people.

26.  In mitigation, I am told the defendant is aged 68 and he lives alone in a public housing unit.  He has a wife, aged 48, who lives on the Mainland.  The defendant has asthma problems and has to be hospitalised on occasions because of complications arising from that.  I am told that in fact when he was last due to appear before the plea court he was unable to attend because he was in hospital because of asthma complications. 

27.  I am told that when he last left prison in early 2012 he was unable to find any work and received Social Security benefits.  His wife is not in good health and he has had to pay medical expenses related to her medical situation.  I am told that it was in those circumstances that he had to approach loan sharks to secure a loan and he needed money to repay those loan sharks. 

28.  I am told that the defendant is ashamed of being convicted of these offences and apologises to the victims.

29.  The only real mitigation in this case is, however, that he co-operated with the police and has pleaded guilty to all the offences, sparing the victims the necessity of having to come to court.

30.  These are appalling offences.  The targets are old people.  They are a very vulnerable section of the community.  The defendant is a confidence trickster who pretended to befriend the victims, only to rob them of their property.  In respect of the first charge, he was fortunate not to have been charged with robbery.  These offences were committed a short while after he had been discharged from a lengthy prison sentence for a number of offences involving old people. 

31.  In my view, the starting point for each of these offences should be a sentence of 3 years and 6 months’ imprisonment.  The defendant is entitled to a discount because he has pleaded guilty, so each of the sentences will be reduced to 2 years and 4 months.

32.  I have considered the question of totality and I order that 4 months of the sentences on Charges 2 and 3 should be consecutive.

33.  The defendant will therefore go to prison for 3 years.