|
DCCC536/2009
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 536 OF 2009
----------------------
----------------------
| Date: |
29 June 2009 at 2.43 pm |
| Present: |
Mr Jones Tsui, PP, of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Mr Chris Yiu, of Messrs Augustine C.Y. Tong & Co., assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Defendant |
----------------------------------
Reasons for Sentence
----------------------------------
1. The defendant has pleaded guilty to a charge of robbery.
2. The particulars are that on 24 April 2009 at the Fook Hing Goldsmith shop, which is at premises on the Ground Floor, of Aberdeen Main Street, in Hong Kong, he robbed a lady called Pang Mun-yee of a gold bracelet.
3. The summary of facts admitted by the defendant state that the victim and her mother were working at the Goldsmith shop which is a family business operated by the victim’s mother. Shortly after 11 o’clock on the morning of 24 April, the defendant went into the shop and told the victim’s mother that he wanted to buy a gold bracelet.
4. The victim then took over the service of the defendant and showed him various items of jewellery. After putting on a gold bracelet, the subject of the charge, the defendant suddenly reached into his right pocket of his trousers and produced a knife. He pointed the knife at the victim and said, “Miss, sorry” and then fled the shop with the gold bracelet.
5. The victim immediately cried out and the victim’s mother chased after the defendant. The victim also activated the burglar alarm system at the shop and went out to give chase. A passer-by, Mr Chan Kai-ming, was passing the shop and heard the victim shouting out. He joined in the chase and this alerted two police officers who were on duty in the vicinity.
6. Those officers subdued the defendant and took away the folded knife which the defendant still had in his right hand. The victim arrived shortly afterwards and positively identified the defendant as the robber and also confirmed that the gold bracelet he was wearing belonged to the shop.
7. The defendant, when cautioned, immediately said, “Ah sir, I snatched the gold bracelet; I had no job: I was greedy.” He later confirmed that admission in a video recorded interview and said he committed the offence because of financial pressure. He said that the bought the folded knife for the purpose of robbery and when he passed the shop and saw there were only two ladies inside, he decided to go in.
8. Fortunately nobody was injured. The gold bracelet was recovered and is valued at $9,500. The folding knife is about 15 cm in length.
9. The defendant has three matters on his record for dishonesty, two of theft and one of blackmail. The first two theft offences the sentence was imposed on the same day and he was sentenced to imprisonment. He was sentenced for an offence of blackmail a few months later and again given a further sentence of imprisonment.
10. In mitigation I was told that the defendant is 28 and comes from a broken family. Apparently his father died when he was 10 and his mother deserted the family soon afterwards. The defendant was brought up by his grandmother. He associated with undesirable peers and left school after form 3. He served his apprenticeship and an air-conditioning apprentice and got into trouble in his early 20s.
11. I was told he was released from prison in June 2005. In December 2008 he married a lady on the Mainland and they have a 2½-year-old daughter and both of those are financially dependant on the defendant. I am told by counsel that the defendant had hoped that when he was married he could mend his ways and stay away from the undesirable peers that he associated with.
12. I am told that when the defendant was working, he earned $10,000 per month and out of that he contributed $4,000 to the family and $1,000 to his grandmother. His wife lived in rented accommodation on the Mainland but since his arrest she has had to move to live with her sister and she is waiting for the defendant to come home after his sentence of imprisonment.
13. I am told that the offence was borne out of financial pressure. He was finding it very difficult to find regular employment and was working only 10 days a month. I was told that prices in Shenzhen are nearly as expensive as in Hong Kong and his savings ran out. His wife fell into arrears with her rental payments and she complained to the defendant about that situation. It was under that pressure that he committed this offence.
14. A letter has been placed before the court written by the defendant expressing his remorse. He says that he misses his family and looks forward to being reunited with them after his sentence. He recognises that he has to be punished for his present offence.
15. For offences of this kind, as counsel has rightly pointed out, the guideline case is the case of R v Mo Kwok-sang in 1981. That lays down that for offences of this kind where the offence is unaccompanied by any aggravating features, the appropriate sentence should be one of 5 years’ imprisonment. Counsel for the defence has conceded that he can point to no features in this case which would enable the court to depart from that sentencing guideline.
16. I have taken into account all the mitigating features which have been urged upon me by the defence counsel and the defendant’s early plea, his admission of the offence at the time of his arrest, and he did not resist when he was arrested by the police. I take a starting point therefore in relation to this offence a sentence of 5 years’ imprisonment and I reduce that by one-third to reflect the defendant’s guilty plea. I therefore sentence the defendant to imprisonment for a period of 40 months.
|