HKSAR v. LAU KAM PUI

DCCC1257/2008

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1257 OF 2008

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

1.  The defendant originally appeared before me on 11 February 2009 charged with one count of robbery.  He pleaded guilty and admitted the facts.  Shortly, they are that the female victim was returning to her residence at about 4 am on 26 November last.  The defendant had approached her and said he had forgotten his key and could she open the grille door for him.  She did.  Thereupon the defendant followed her into the premises and suddenly pushed her and snatched her white handbag and fled. 

2.  Subsequently, police located the defendant and a search revealed some items of property of the victim.  The defendant was arrested, cautioned and admitted that he had snatched the handbag as he was drunk. 

3.  I was told the defendant had a clear record.

4.  Mitigation had followed on the last occasion where a large number of letters and testimonials were handed to the court.  They came from, inter alia, District Board Members, family and other prominent members of the community and included a letter from the defendant himself.  They attested to the fact that the defendant was very active in community service.  I was told the defendant had been the victim of a fraud himself with respect to a former girlfriend who he had helped to build a house and she promptly left him.  I am told he had given her approximately $100,000. 

5.  On the night in question, he had drunk alcohol at a party with colleagues, got drunk and then remembered he had to pay a fixed penalty ticket the next day.  He thereupon committed this offence.  I was further told in mitigation that this is a borderline snatching/robbery offence.  It was stressed that the defendant had a positive good character and not just a clear record.  He was very remorseful for what he had done.

6.  In all the circumstances, I thought it appropriate to get a background report.  Such is forthcoming today and the contents have been read over and explained to the defendant.  He agrees such contents. 

7.  I regarded the matter very seriously.  It occurred late at night, or rather early in the morning, 4 am.  The defendant had followed the female victim into a block of flats and then pushed her, snatching her handbag and fleeing.  The victim must have been scared and frightened and rightly so.  I am aware the property was recovered but that does not lessen the offence. 

8.  The authorities suggest that for a robbery simpliciter where no weapon is produced, a starting point of 4 years is the appropriate one.  It had been put to me that this is more akin to a snatching with the minimal amount of violence which was a pushing of the victim.  It is obvious that a custodial sentence is called for. 

9.  In all the circumstances, I am of the view that a starting point of 3 years and 6 months is the appropriate one.

10.  The defendant will get the full discount with respect to his plea of guilty and the extensive mitigation put.  Accordingly, he will be sentenced to 2 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.