HKSAR v. LAU YIU WAH, JACKY

DCCC 219/2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 219 OF 2013

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1. The defendant has pleaded guilty to two offences relating to his possession and use of forged credit cards. In respect of the first charge, he actually used a forged Diners Club International card. A second forged Diners Club International Card was found in his possession following his arrest.

2. The facts admitted by the defendant state that at about lunch time on 6 December 2012 a party of plainclothes police officers were conducting an anti-theft operation in the Causeway Bay area.  They saw the defendant and another man acting suspiciously outside the Luk Fook Jewellery on Lee Garden Road. 

3. The defendant and the other man were seen to enter the jewellery shop and were served by a saleslady.  The defendant told the saleslady that he was going to get married and would like to buy a gold necklace and bracelet and selected one valued at just over $54,000.  He produced a forged Diner Club International card in his name.  However, the card was not accepted by the processing machine.  He was asked if he had another card and he said that he did not and left the shop.

4. The defendant was intercepted by the police officers outside the East Point Centre in Hennessy Road, Causeway Bay.

5. Inquiries at the jewellery shop revealed that he had used the credit card and it had not been accepted.

6. He was arrested for using a forged credit card and he admitted the offence.

7. When the defendant was searched at the police station the second forged Diners Club International card was found in his possession.  This had been concealed at the waist area between his clothes and his jeans.  He said he had never used that card.

8. In a video recorded interview the defendant admitted that he had collected the cards at Lo Wu from a person he knew only as Ah B.  He said he did not know Ah B, where or how Ah B had made the forged credit cards, and he said that he knew the cards were forged and had only used one of the cards at the jewellery shop.

9. The defendant has a number of previous convictions. He has appeared before the court on 11 previous occasions.  The last occasion was in 2008, when he was sentenced to imprisonment for drug-related offences. There are no convictions for any similar offences recorded on his record.

10. The defendant was born in China, he is now aged 40.  He moved to Hong Kong when he was aged 9 and he was educated to Form 3 standard.  He has previously had employment in restaurants working in the kitchen, and as a transportation worker, but at the time of the offence he was unemployed.  The defendant lives alone in North Point.  He is divorced, there were no children of the marriage, and he has lost contact with his family.  The defendant has a drug problem.  He also has a gambling problem and he had accumulated gambling debts and was being chased by debt collectors.  I am told that it was suggested to him by these collectors that he engage in this dishonest activity to provide him with an opportunity of repaying his debts.

11. The offences are serious.  The Court of Appeal have said that deterrent sentences must be given for those who commit offences of this kind.  The integrity of the credit card system is highly important today and modern commercial life is eroded by those who use fraudulent methods to undermine the system. 

12. I note that the defendant’s attempt to use one of the cards was unsuccessful.  However, but the important fact in these cases is the potential for losses.  As offences of this kind go, the defendant’s offences were definitely at the lower end of the criminal scale.  I take the view that a starting point of 3 years is appropriate for these offences, and given the circumstances of the offence, concurrent sentences are appropriate.  Those sentences will be reduced by one-third to reflect the defendant’s guilty plea.

13. The defendant will therefore go to prison for a total period of 2 years.