HKSAR v. PHAM BICH THUY

DCCC1254/2008

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1254 OF 2008 

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

---------------------- 

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  The defendant appears before me today and pleads guilty to one charge of Attempted theft.  It is attempted pickpocketing, in effect.

2.  The facts have been read out to and agreed by her.  As indicated, she has pleaded guilty to the charge.

3.  Shortly, they are, that about 5.40 pm on 29 November she was observed at a shopping arcade.  She was observed to use her hand to touch the zip of a handbag being carried by another person.  When the unsuspecting person noticed it, the defendant walked away and was subsequently approached by a policeman who witnessed the incident.

4.  She was arrested and cautioned and replied, “Ah Sir, I did not manage to steal from her, give me a chance.”

5.  The defendant’s record was produced.  It shows 14 sets of matters and most of them are for theft or attempted theft.  The defendant has agreed that record.  She was sentenced as recently as 8 May 2007 on a similar offence.  She was sentenced on that occasion to 15 months’ imprisonment, I am told, after a trial.  The defendant has agreed that record.

6.  Mitigation has followed in which I am told that she arrived here in 1988 as a refugee from Vietnam.  She is 41 and now divorced.  She has two children - two daughters - 16 years old and five years old, who are in court today.  She has no other relative in Hong Kong.

7.  I am told that the offence was committed because she needed the money to support a dangerous drug habit that she has got.  I am also told that in this case there was no weapon used and it was not planned but was a spontaneous act.  It was committed by her alone and I will deal with it on that basis.  There was no loss to the victim.

8.  A letter has been produced from the daughter, who I said was present in court today, asking for leniency for her mother.  She has a dangerous drug addiction and the court has been asked if they could do something about that.

9.  The defendant has also given the court a letter, which virtually says the same thing and asks for leniency.

10.  I regard the offence as a serious one.  This sort of offence gives Hong Kong a bad reputation and persons should be entitled to walk the streets of Hong Kong or in shopping arcades in the knowledge that their property that is on them, or around them, is safe.

11.  The higher courts have said that starting points of about 15 months are appropriate in matters of this nature.  But to my mind the matter is aggravated for two reasons: (1) it occurred in a public place, a shopping arcade where persons would be likely to be and (2) the defendant is a persistent offender in matters of this nature.  As I say, she has 14 sets of previous matters, most of them relating to pickpocketing or attempted pickpocketing.

12.  Clearly, she has not been deterred by previous convictions and sentences from carrying on the same type of activity.  I know that she wants and the daughter at least wants her to go to a drug addiction treatment centre.  But that to my mind is not, in all the circumstances here, an appropriate sentence.  Although a period of incarceration will have the desired effect, I hope, of ridding her of her addiction.

13.  I am of the view that a higher starting point than 15 months is appropriate here, for reasons that I have already stated.  Therefore, in all the circumstances I am going to take a starting point of 24 months’ imprisonment.  From that new starting point the defendant will get the full credit that a plea of guilty entails.  Accordingly, the defendant will be convicted and sentenced to 16 months’ imprisonment.