HKSAR v. NG KWOK WAI

DCCC277/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 277 OF 2012

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1. The defendant pleaded guilty to one charge of Burglary.

2. Facts admitted by the defendant.  At the material time both the defendant and Tang Kai-yin, PW1, were tenants of 4th Floor, 10 Man On Street in Tak Kok Tsui.

3. PW1 lived alone in Room 1 (Room 1) which was secured by a door.  The defendant lived in another room.  PW1 left Room 1 secured but unattended at about 3 am on 21 February this year.  When PW1 returned at about 12 noon he found the door to Room 1 ajar.  After checking the contents of the room he found that his notebook computer, together with a USB which was inserted with a SIM Card was missing.  The value of the missing property was about $6,380. 

4. PW1 reported the matter to police.  At about 1 pm on the same day PC10614, PW2, intercepted the defendant for stop and search in Mong Kok.  PW2 found PW1’s computer and USB on the defendant upon search. Under caution the defendant alleged that his neighbour had asked him to take the computer for repair.  Later on in the same day, PW1 positively identified the computer and the USB as his property.  He denied that he had asked the defendant to take his computer for repair.

5. In the first record of interview the defendant claimed that the computer was given to him by Wong Chi Kin on 14 February 2012 for repairs.  In the second record of interview the defendant claimed that he had taken the computer to teach Fat Chai a lesson not to leave valuable property inside the premises and that he had been given permission by the landlord to enter the rooms in the premises.  Mr Kan Chan-pui, PW4, the landlord stated that he had never given such permission to the defendant.

Background and mitigation

6. The defendant is now aged 41 and married.  His wife lives in China and she has an 8 year old son from a previous marriage.

7. The defendant was educated to primary 5 level. He suffered a fracture in 2006.  He was unemployed at the time of arrest and was living on comprehensive social assistance.  He has 15 previous convictions, three of which are related to dishonesty.  His last conviction was in June 2008. 

8. The defendant has been assessed at Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre a number of times.  The last assessment was in March of this year.  On each occasion he was found to have no psychiatric illness but was repeatedly diagnosed with Dissocial Personality Disorder.  In the report from Dr Robyn Ho the defendant was described as having callous unconcern for the feeling of others, rules and persistent attitude of irresponsibility, disregard for social norms, rules and obligations, very low tolerance to frustration and a low threshold for discharge of aggression, incapacity to experience guilt or to profit from experience, particularly punishment, marked proneness to blame others and persistent irritability.  His insight was limited and prognosis was poor.  There was a very high risk of recidivism however the doctor was of the view that no treatment was required at this juncture.

9. Counsel submitted that the defendant has pleaded guilty which, in turn, saved court’s time.  The defendant has previous convictions for dishonesty but they happened a long time ago.  A letter written by the defendant was submitted but in most of the letter was questions raised by the defendant about the appropriateness of charging him and the adequacy of the evidence.

Sentence

10. This is a case of burglary of domestic premises.  It does not appear to be well planned or organised.  Although the defendant has previous convictions for dishonesty, I will not treat him as a persistent offender.  However, I see no reason to depart from the normal sentence for such offences.  I adopt a starting point of 3 years’ imprisonment.  I give the defendant full credit for his guilty plea.  The sentence is therefore reduced to 2 years.