HKSAR v. TANG KWOK KEUNG

DCCC49/2011

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO.49 OF 2011

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

The defendant was charged for theft, contrary to section 9 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap.210.

The defendant pleaded guilty and admitted the facts, he was convicted accordingly.

Facts

On 12 December 2010, outside No.30 Yuen Long New Street (a wet market), the defendant stole the wrist chain with 6 pieces of jade wearing on the victim’s right wrist by using a pair of pliers to cut it off. The victim was an old lady aged 81.

The cutting caused a laceration and bleeding, the victim shouted for help. The defendant fled leaving behind the pliers and the wrist chain on the ground. A nearby noticed the situation, he intercepted and struggled with the defendant.

Police was alerted, and the defendant was arrested. Under caution, the defendant admitted that he stole the wrist chain from the victim with the pliers.

I considered the present case is akin to Pickpocket, of which the normal starting point for a fresh offender is 12 – 15 months. Here the defendant used a pair of pliers in stealing from an old lady in a wet market, causing actual injury to her; I consider these to be aggravating factors, and consider the appropriate starting point to be 24 months.

The defendant aged 49, a causal construction site worker earning $300 per day; he is divorced but still lives with his ex-wife and children. He committed the present offence out of greed but he did not intend to hurt the victim, however, taking into account of the pliers used, I considered the defendant was reckless as to whether the victim would be hurt by his act.

The defendant has 22 previous conviction records involving 27 charges, 20 were related to dishonesty. The defendant was last discharged from prison in April 2010 for a pickpocket offence. It is apparent that the defendant is a persistent offender, and the previous sentences were not sufficient to deter him from committing further offences, I consider a deterrent sentence is called for in the present case and I increase the starting point by 6 months.

The defendant is entitled to 1/3 discount for his plea, I do not consider there to be any mitigating factor that call for further deduction.

Order

The defendant is sentenced to 20 months imprisonment.