|
DCCC 605/2025
[2025] HKDC 2126
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 605 OF 2025
________________________
________________________
| Before: |
H.H. Judge G. Lam |
| Present: |
Ms. Vivien Chan, counsel on fiat, for HKSAR. |
| |
Mr. Chan Siu Ming instructed by M/s Ho & Associates, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant. |
| Offences: |
(1) Theft（盜竊） |
| |
(2) Burglary（入屋犯法） |
________________________
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
________________________
The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "Theft" (Charge 1) and a charge of "Burglary" (Charge 2). First, he stole 4 rolls of chocolate from a supermarket. On the next day, he broke into a primary school and stole an iPad.
Summary of Facts
Charge 1
2. About 10:30 p.m. on 21 June 2024, the branch manager of the Wellcome Supermarket at Sha Tau Kok Chuen ("the Shop") found 4 rolls of Meiji gummy chocolate missing (valued at $119.60 in total).
3. CCTV footage captured the defendant entering the Shop at 8:51 p.m. on the same day. He took 4 rolls of chocolate at 8:57 p.m. and left the Shop through its back door without making payment.
Charge 2
4. About 7:50 a.m. on 22 June 2024, a janitor of Sha Tau Kok Central Primary School ("the School") found the door lock of the principal's office damaged. Later, an iPad (valued at $2,000) placed inside a drawer in the school reception area was found missing.
5. CCTV footage captured the defendant wandering around the school reception area at 3:20 a.m. on the same day. He opened the drawers and took an iPad from one of the drawers. He then walked upstairs to the 1st Floor holding the iPad and flashing the light of his mobile phone. Between 3:23 and 3:44 in the same morning, he kept prizing the door of the principal's office, but was unsuccessful. The defendant left the School at 4:13 a.m. and arrived at Sha Tau Kok Chuen after 20 minutes.
Arrest and admissions
6. The defendant was arrested by the police on 27 June 2024. Under caution, regarding Charge 1, he admitted stealing the 4 rolls of chocolate from the Shop. He claimed that he was hungry and had no money to buy food. Regarding Charge 2, the defendant admitted going inside the School to look for something valuable. He took a tablet from one of the rooms and sold it afterwards.
Other evidence
7. The police found 2 empty tubes in the defendant's home, which matched the chocolates missing from the Shop.
8. An electronic cigarette containing the defendant's DNA was found in the janitor's room at the School.
Mitigation & Sentence
9. The defendant is 39 and has 10 conviction records, which included 1 "Burglary" offence and 13 "Theft" offences. Defence counsel Mr. Chan informed me the defendant is single and resides alone in a public housing unit. He is unemployed but does not receive any social welfare benefits. In mitigation, Mr. Chan submitted that Charge 1 is a shoplifting offence; whereas the burglary in Charge 2 is not the most serious of its kind.
10. Time after time, the court has expressed in very clear terms that being in financial difficulty (however serious) is no mitigating factor for committing a crime. There is sufficient social welfare protection in modern Hong Kong for the poor to meet their basic needs (including food). Being a released prisoner, the defendant must have known how to seek help.
11. The defendant's latest conviction record involved 2 violence-related offences (STCC 1449/2024), for which he was sentenced to a total prison term of 10 months on 7 June 2024. Yet, he committed the present 2 offences on 21 and 22 June 2024. Obviously, he has no law-abiding attitude.
12. Regarding Charge 1, the defendant's most recent "Theft" conviction is dated 16 January 2024, for which he was sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment. Notwithstanding the value of the chocolates, I adopt a starting point of 9 months' imprisonment. With the timely guilty plea, I sentence the defendant to 6 months' imprisonment for this charge.
13. Regarding Charge 2, the normal starting point for non-domestic burglary is 2.5 years' imprisonment. Despite his long history of theft-related offences, the defendant only has 1 conviction of "Burglary" (dated 2003). I will not increase the usual starting point. With the timely guilty plea, I sentence him to 20 months' imprisonment for this charge.
14. Both offences in the present case took place within 2 days. Since the defendant repeatedly broke the law in 2024 by committing different offences, the totality element carries little weight in this case. I order 4 months in Charge 1 to run consecutively to the sentence for Charge 2, thereby resulting in a total prison term of 24 months for both charges.
|