HKSAR v. CHUM PUI KEUNG

DCCC 464/2014

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 464 OF 2014

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  You have pleaded guilty to two charges, the first being theft, contrary to section 9 of the Theft Ordinance. It was theft of a light goods vehicle. The second charge is blackmail, contrary to section 23(1) and (3) of the Theft Ordinance, and the victim of the blackmail offence was the owner of the vehicle, and you essentially demanded $35,000 for the return of the stolen vehicle.

2.  The facts are that on 18 April this year, PW1, a driver working for PW2, parked the company’s light goods vehicle in its normal car park in Wong Tai Sin Estate.  He locked it and left it after work. The next day it was discovered stolen.

3.  You are an ex‑employee of PW2.  You called PW2 a few days after the vehicle was stolen to say you knew of this fact but could locate the vehicle.  Later that same day you told PW2 that you had found the vehicle, but he would have to pay $35,000 for it to be returned.  PW2 told you that he did not have that much money.  Subsequently there was a negotiation of this amount of money.  You even told him to borrow money if he wanted the vehicle returned.

4.  PW2 made a report to the police of your demands.  He then told you that he could pay $18,000, and you accepted this payment, for the return of the vehicle.  When you and he met up to exchange the money, you were arrested by the police. 

5.  You denied the offence.  You told the police you were only helping him locate his vehicle, and that it was in Lau Fau Shan.

6.  After your arrest you were taken to the police station.  You tried to conceal the two keys of that stolen vehicle that were on your person at the police station, but the police found them.  When the vehicle was located in Lau Fau Shan, police tried the keys that you had tried to hide, and they belonged to the vehicle.

7.  It was then, under caution, you admitted driving the vehicle from Wong Tai Sin to Lau Fau Shan, and that you had thrown away the licences of the vehicle.

8.  Your plea of guilty is your best mitigation today.  You are 54 years old.  You are married, with two grown-up sons, and at the time of your arrest, you were a driver.

9.  I have a letter of mitigation written by you before me expressing your remorse.

10.  You are not a man of clear record, but 10 of your 14 previous convictions were committed in the 70s when you were 16 years old.  In the 90s you were convicted of making off without payment and an attempted theft.  In 2007 and 2011 you were convicted of theft offences, for which you were sentenced to 2 months’ imprisonment and a suspended sentence respectively.  Clearly these two offences today are the most serious offences you have committed since you were 16 years old.

11.  They are serious offences.  In particular, the maximum sentence for blackmail is 14 years’ imprisonment.  But I accept Mr Woon’s submission that the facts of this case are not the most serious facts for an offence of this nature; that the facts are not triad-related; nor did you threaten any victim with violence or any harm.  Nonetheless, an offence of this nature will attract a starting point of 3 years or more.

12.  Thefts of vehicles often attract a starting point of 3 years or more.  You have said in your letter that you were not the mastermind, but that you were an ex‑employee of PW2’s company, and as his driver, you knew that drivers had the practice of placing the key of the company vehicles between the wheels of the vehicle, and anyone with that knowledge would know the vehicle could easily be stolen.  So even if you were not acting alone, you certainly knew PW2’s vehicle would be an easy target.

13.  Defendant, please stand up.  After careful consideration of the offences, the facts, your background and the mitigation put forward, for Charge 1 I will take a starting point of 2 years and 6 months.  For Charge 2 I will take a starting point of 3 years.

14.  You pleaded guilty.  You are entitled to a discount of one‑third on these starting points.

15.  Therefore, after that discount, for Charge 1, you are sentenced to 1 year 8 months’ imprisonment. For Charge 2, you are sentenced to 2 years’ imprisonment.

16.  These two offences are separate and distinct and they were committed by you on separate days, but I take into account the second charge arises from the first charge, and I also take into account the totality principle.

17.  After considering that, I order that 6 months of Charge 1 be served consecutively to Charge 2, and the balance concurrently.

18.  Accordingly, the total sentence you will serve is 2 years and 6 months’ imprisonment.