HKSAR v. HUI CHUN-YIU

DCCC1108/2011

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1108 of 2011

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  The defendant pleaded guilty to one charge of burglary contrary to section 11(1)(b) and (4) of the Theft Ordinance, Cap. 210.

2.  The particulars are that on 1 February this year, the defendant entered as a trespasser part of a building known as a rooftop of Lok Man Sun Chuen, Kowloon, attempted to steal there in some copper plates. 

3.  The facts are that at about 3.45 in the afternoon, a security guard on patrol noticed that the padlock to the gate to the rooftop of this building had been tampered with, in fact, switched.  That security guard notified her supervisor and she and others went to the rooftop to investigate.  They discovered that in fact the padlock had now disappeared and the metal gate leading to the rooftop was open.

4.  They discovered on the rooftop that some copper plates which were used as lightening conductors had been dismantled and were left on the floor.  The copper plates had been valued at between HK$40,000 to HK$50,000.  These copper plates would be easy to resale to scrap metal shops. The police arrived to investigate and found various items on the roof including bags, tools and the defendant’s identity card as well as other identifying documents in a wallet.  A pair of gloves and a padlock were found in the building on the 20th Floor.  Knowing the defendant’s identity the defendant was put on a wanted list and on 3 August, some months later, was stopped and questioned on the street.  Clearly because of his wanted status he was arrested.

5.  In record of interview, under caution, the defendant made a full admission.  He explained that he trespassed in the building with the intention to steal copper plates.  He used tools to dismantle the copper plates and when he heard security guards patrolling, he fled without taking his wallet and his identity card with him.

6.  The defendant’s plea of guilty today is his best mitigation.  The defendant is now 32 years old; single but has a girlfriend and a young daughter to care for.  The defendant has an appalling criminal record, some 14 previous convictions.  Although he has no similar conviction to burglary he has many offences that involve dishonesty. 

7.  I have considered the antecedent as well as further mitigation put forward on his behalf this morning and I have heard that although it is a burglary offence he had carried no weapons nor committed any violence nor scared any resident in this building.

8.  The defendant should be made aware that the normal sentence for burglary of domestic premises - and this is a domestic building - would be a three year starting point where there is no aggravating or mitigating factors.  The normal sentence for a burglary of a non-domestic premises where there is no aggravating or mitigating factors would be 2 years and six months starting point. 

9.  I have considered the facts here and noted that the defendant went to the rooftop knowing he could find copper plates there and I have been told that there was no one living on the rooftop so I am prepared to lower the starting point from the norm of a burglary of a domestic premises.  I will take a starting point of 2 years and six months but I will not go any lower than that because the value of the items the defendant attempted to steal is high and by dismantling copper plates that are there for a reason it could possibly pose a danger to the residents of that building by dismantling these copper plates.  

10.  With a 2 year and six months starting point you are entitled to a discount of one-third, that is, 10 months for your plea of guilty today.  For this offence you are sentenced to 1 year and 8 months’ imprisonment.