HKSAR v. SIU CHOI KEUNG

DCCC732/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 732 OF 2009

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Defendant, you have pleaded to an offence of burglary, contrary to Section 11(1)(b) and (4) of the Theft Ordinance.

2.  You have admitted on the 16th day of May 2009, you entered as a trespasser a storeroom of Guangdong Roast Restaurant, at the Mezzanine Floor, No. 21, Tai Wing Lane, Tai Po, New Territories, and stole thereform cash of $250, a bottle of wine valued at $2,500 and ten packets of cigarettes.

3.  The storeroom had been left secured but unattended by the proprietor of the restaurant in the late hours of 15 May 2009. 

4.  At round 1.30 am on 16 May, you entered the storeroom by prizing open the door and stealing these properties. 

5.  It was known that you had stolen these properties as you were viewed from the CCTV that was installed in the storeroom.   

6.  The employer had recognised you on the CCTV as his former employee.  You had worked for him as a chef between 6 June 2006 and October 2008 when you resigned. 

7.  You were put on the wanted list by the police and you were eventually stopped on the 5 June 2009 in the early hours of morning. 

8.  In a video-recorded interview, you admitted you had committed this burglary offence.  You said that as you were a former employee of the restaurant, you had a key to the storeroom which you did not return when you ceased employment. 

9.  On the material day, you used the key to enter the storeroom and thereafter, took a chopper from the kitchen of the storeroom and prized open the secured office.  You had switched off the power supply of the CCTV during the burglary. 

10.  You had used all the storeroom properties that you had stolen. 

11.  A palm print was lifted near the lock of the office door and a fingerprint was lifted on a tin box inside the storeroom were found to match with yours.

12.  You are 37 years of age and have eight previous convictions of which one is for burglary, almost now over 20 years ago.  You have a number of convictions related to drugs. 

13.  Your solicitor, Mr Ng, has made extremely brief mitigation, one sentence really, your early plea of guilty and your remorse.  That of course is the greatest mitigating factor in this case.

14.  Although you were a former employee of this restaurant, it is akin to that of a breach of trust, but the time you burgled this premises, you were no longer employed there, so I do not take that as an aggravating factor. 

15.  I am not told of the reasons why you have committed this burglary, I can only assume it is and may be because of your addiction to drugs.  Nevertheless, this is a commercial burglary of which there are clear guidelines that the starting point after trial is one of 2½ years' imprisonment. 

16.  You have pleaded guilty.  I, of course, will give you your full one-third discount and reduce that to 1 year and 8 months’ imprisonment to which you are so sentenced.