HKSAR v. TAM YAU KEUNG

 DCCC50/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 50 OF 2010

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Defendant, you pleaded guilty to a single offence of robbery, contrary to section 10 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap.210. You admitted the Brief Facts and I convicted you.

2.  The facts were as follows. At about 12.15 pm on 18 November 2009, Tsang Chiu-kan, PW1, a female aged 60, was waiting for a lift on the 3rd floor, Wing Sam House, Lung Hang Estate, Shatin with her 4-year-old granddaughter. You approached her from behind and tried to snatch her handbag. She put up a struggle during which she lost her balance and fell to the floor. She grabbed the strap of her handbag and you dragged her for about 2 metres. You then squatted in front of her and jabbed PW1’s chest with your elbow a few times. Her face was knocked to the ground resulting in 5 teeth being broken. However, she still held onto her handbag.

3.  You then threatened to harm her granddaughter if she did not let go. You grasped the granddaughter’s head and pushed her towards PW1. PW1 then let go and yelled for help. You fled with the handbag. A passer-by called the police.

4.  The handbag contained PW1’s ID card, Octopus card, a pendant, a watch and a wallet containing $1,490, a coin bag and a mobile phone; the mobile phone is P2.

5.  Two police officers attended the scene. At about 12.48 pm that day one of the officers saw you in the lift lobby of the 11th floor. When he approached you, you fled, but the officer subdued you and found a mobile phone in the pocket of your jacket.

6.  Upon arrest and caution, you remained silent. The handbag was recovered on the 6th floor, and I am told by the prosecution that the contents were also therein.

7.  Interviewed later under caution you admitted snatching the bag from PW1 and taking the mobile phone plus $490($1,490?). You then abandoned the handbag. The prosecution case is that you robbed PW1 and took the properties in the charge.

8.  You admitted to 14 previous convictions on 12 appearances with 8 related to dishonesty. I do note that this is your first conviction for robbery.

9.  Ms Lee on your behalf entered persuasive mitigation, inter alia, she told me that you were the youngest of 9 children and resided with your elderly mother. You paid money for your mother’s upkeep. At the time of the commission of this offence you were in debt as a result of a failed business venture. You owed somewhere in the region of $50,000 and only obtained casual work earning some $2,500 to $3,000 a month.

10.  Ms Lee emphasized your remorse and plea of guilty. Ms Lee then read out two letters, the first from you yourself where you expressed remorse for the offence and apologies to the victim; the second letter was from one of your elder brothers who expressed his support for you.

11.  Ms Lee referred to the criminal record which she accepted to be lengthy but pointed out that this was the first offence of robbery. The majority of your previous convictions involved minor thefts. Very realistically, Ms Lee accepted that the violence to the victim must be an aggravating feature and that the victim must have been in great fear. Also that the threat to the granddaughter must indeed amount to an aggravating feature.

12.  Ms Lee also referred me to four sentencing authorities though I do note that each was decided on the particular facts of the case. Those authorities were the case of HKSAR v Mohammad Munir CACC579/1999, HKSAR v Lam Ka Hung CACC294/2003, HKSAR v Chui Chi Hung CACC334/2006 and HKSAR v Li Siu Wah CACC389/2008. I have noted and taken into account of those decisions and the various sections that Ms Lee referred me to.

13.  To summarize the position, it is suggested that the proper starting point for an offence such as we are dealing with today is between 4 and 5 years. On your behalf it is urged and submitted that the appropriate starting point should be towards the lower end of the scale, that is 4 years.

14.  I turn now to the sentence. I accept that in the present case no weapon was used and all property has been recovered. However, I do note the aggravating features of the unacceptable level of violence resulting in the lady of 60 years of age being dragged for 2 metres, jabbed in the chest and her face knocked onto the ground, resulting in 5 broken teeth. I have to say that in my opinion your threat to harm and your manhandling of the 4-year-old granddaughter was particularly reprehensible.

15.  You are a man of a substantial record for criminal offences, especially crimes of dishonesty. I do note that this is your first conviction for robbery, but looking at the previous conviction and the present conviction, the seriousness of those convictions does seem to be escalating.

16.  Slightly in your favour, I do accept that the motive was to obtain money to repay a debt from a failed business venture, not to buy drugs, not to settle gambling debts.

17.  Taking all factors into account, I have to say that I find this to be a serious example of non-armed robbery. This is particularly so given the level of violence extended to the victim, the injury she sustained and the threat to the young granddaughter. In all the circumstances I take a starting point of 4½ years reduced to 3 years for your plea of guilty. You will go to prison for 3 years.