HKSAR v. CHAN PING MAN

 DCCC1187/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1187 OF 2009

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to one offence of robbery, contrary to section 10 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap. 210. A further offence of burglary is not proceeded with and ordered to remain on file. The facts of the case to which you have pleaded guilty are as follows.

2.  At about 4.30 am on 17 July last you entered illegally into Flat C on the 9th Floor, Pacific Palisades, Tower 9, 1 Braemar Hill, by climbing up pipes. PW1, a female aged 50, was asleep alone in the bedroom. She was awakened by a noise, but being afraid, remained in her bed. Suddenly, holding a torch, you covered her mouth and demanded money.

3.  You said that you did not intend to harm her. PW1 led you to the sitting room and gave you $620 and a Hongkong Bank Visa card. Thereafter, you asked her to go to the bedroom. Because she was crying you took two scarves from the bedroom’s wardrobe and used them to tie PW1’s hands from behind and cover PW1’s mouth.

4.  You asked PW1 to look for valuable property or jewellery for you. Whilst walking near the toilet, PW1 kicked you from behind and a struggle ensued. During the struggle, you were seen holding a scissors-like object. PW1 bit you once but she was finally subdued by you and you threatened to hurt PW1 with the scissors-like object. She struggled again.

5.  You demanded that PW1 go into the bedroom and close her eyes. After about 5 minutes you left. PW1 checked her property and found in addition to the $620 she had given to you a mobile phone was missing but the Visa card was left on the table in the bedroom. She called a security guard and the police were informed.

6.  Captured on the CCTV, PW1 saw you inside one of the lifts. When you went out from the lift, the police arrived and arrested you at the main entrance. She identified you to the police. PW1’s mobile phone was recovered from your left trousers pocket. A police officer found $620 in your wallet and a black torch in your right trousers pocket. Under caution you admitted that you had climbed up to the flat in which you took a mobile phone and $620.

7.  At the material time, you put PW1 in fear of being then and there subjected to force. You admitted to 11 previous convictions on seven occasions, ten of which involved dishonesty, mainly burglary.

8.  Mr Wong on your behalf entered mitigation. He told me that you are 52 years of age, married but separated, with a son of eleven. Your mother is elderly, in poor health and in her nineties. She is wheelchair-bound. He told me that you had a difficult early life, having lost an eye after an accident and as a result of medical negligence when you were ten. The government, presumably in recognition of the medical negligence, had offered to fund your education up to tertiary level. However, your father, who held certain strong political persuasions, refused their offer. The result was that you were merely educated to P5.

9.  I am told that your wife is about to divorce you and that she and your son have moved to an address which she refuses to divulge. In short, you have lost contact with your family.

10.  Mr Wong told me that the present offence was committed in order to provide funds to purchase a computer for your son to use at school. He very reasonably acknowledges that this does not excuse what you did, but explains, perhaps.

11.  This was in fact a burglary that went badly wrong. On your behalf, he acknowledges the seriousness of the offence and urges mercy. He makes the point that the leading guideline on sentence, Mo Kwong Sang is but a guideline and not a straitjacket. He points to your plea of guilty and your co‑operation with the police. Also, he makes the point that you hope you can be released from prison prior to your mother’s passing away.e a

12.  I turn now to the sentence. The prosecution, very properly, under Mo Kwong Sang contend that a starting point of some 7 years is appropriate, this being a robbery which took place in domestic premises where a weapon was displayed and involved the tying-up of the victim. There is force in that argument.

13.  You have an appalling criminal record, especially for offences of burglary. I accept that essentially this was a burglary that went badly wrong; a burglary that turned into a robbery by force of circumstances rather than by intent. However, when you enter premises at this time of the day, you run the risk of encountering people asleep. The victim, who appears to have been alone, must have been terrified and it seems to me that she showed a great deal of courage and presence of mind in all the circumstances. I commend her for her actions. It is fortunate that she was not harmed and that her property was recovered.

14.  I accept that you have been co-operative with the police at the time of your arrest and note your plea of guilty. I also accept that your apology which you offered to the victim from the dock is genuine. I note the difficulties that you have had in life and seem to continue to have. However, this is a very serious matter. To illegally enter someone’s home, to threaten them, to tie them up and steal their property is a very serious matter indeed.

15.  For the mitigation that I have mentioned, there will be a slight discount. In all the circumstances, I do take a starting point of 6½ years, which will be reduced to 4 years and 4 months for your plea of guilty. Therefore, you will go to prison for 4 years and 4 months.