HKSAR v. LAW KIN WAH

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1997, No. 39

(Criminal)

________________

________________

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

Mayo JA giving the judgment of the Court:

1. The applicant pleaded guilty to robbery and attempting to cause an explosion with intent to endanger life or property. He was sentenced to five years four months' imprisonment on the first count and six years eight months on the second and Saied J the sentencing judge ordered that four months of the first count should be consecutive to the sentence on the second count thus leaving a total sentence of seven years' imprisonment. The applicant seeks leave to appeal against these sentences.

2. On the agreed facts the offences were very serious ones. The applicant who was aged 16 at the time of the offences broke into the premises which were occupied by the family of one of his schoolmates in order to steal money so that he could indulge his passion for playing video games.

3. After breaking into the premises he saw the family's domestic servant who recognised him. She did not say anything and went to her room. She was followed by the applicant who threatened her with a chopper and told her to take off her clothes and tie herself up.

4. When the maid tried to resist him he attacked her with the chopper and caused quite serious injuries. These were described as follows

"A 15mm long laceration over dorsal side of the left forearm.

A 15mm long laceration over the dorsal ulnar aspect of the left wrist.

Two 1 cm long lacerations over middle finger which had full active range of movement of the left hand.

A 15mm long superficial laceration over the palmar aspect of the base of left ring finger.

A 7cm superficial laceration over upper dorsal part of the right forearm.

A 15mm long deep laceration connected with a 4cm long abrasion line over the distal dorsal part of the right forearm.

A 10cm long abrasion line over the anterior aspect of the left shin.

10. PW1 was discharged after treatment with nine days' sick leave recommended, but was admitted to hospital on 20.8.96 for observation and was discharged on 22.8.96."

5. The telephone then rang. The applicant ordered the maid to answer it. She did so. However she managed to escape to her room and lock the door. The applicant tried to re-enter the room but was unable to do so.

6. During the initial attack on the maid he managed to extract $420 from her. So far as the facts of the second count are concerned I can do no better than to read them from the agreed facts.

"13. The Defendant then went into the kitchen to wash the bloodstains on the chopper. He switched on the gas stove and tried to blow off the fire of the gas stove, but in vain. He then put off the fire by pouring some detergent onto the stove. The Defendant then cut off the gas pipe with the chopper. He also closed all the windows in the living room and cut off the telephone cords. Then he went into the toilet to get a can of hairspray, put it in the microwave oven and turned the oven on and pressed the 10-minute button. When he was leaving, he saw PW4 and his family came back, but he ignored them.

14. The Defendant admitted under caution that he wanted the gas to come out so as to burn the house. He put the hairspray into the microwave oven and turned it on because he hoped for an explosion to burn the house to destroy the evidence."

7. It is clear from the fairly lengthy Reasons for Sentence that Saied J gave the most anxious thought and consideration to this case particularly having regard to the applicant's youth.

8. He had before him a psychiatric report and Probation Training and Detention Centre Reports. He was unable to treat the applicant as a first offender as he had a previous conviction for indecent assault.

9. Saied J adopted as his starting point 8 years for the first offence and 10 years for the second. He gave the usual 1/3 discount for the pleas and having regard to the totality adjusted the total sentence to 7 years' imprisonment.

10. In his grounds of appeal the applicant refers to his youth, his remorse and his desire to turn over a new leaf.

11. Having regard to the seriousness of these offences these sentences were lenient. The application is without merit and is refused.