HKSAR v. MA TSZ HO

DCCC113/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 113 OF 2009

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

1.  The Defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of assault with intend to rob, contrary to section 10 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap 210.

The facts of the case:-

2.  At about 7 pm on 28/12/2008, the Defendant entered into a lift with PW1 and followed her after she came out from the lift.

3.  The Defendant grabbed PW1’s neck from behind and covered her mouth with his hand. PW1 struggled and shouted for help. The Defendant fled to the staircase.

4.  When the Defendant dashed out from the staircase on the ground floor of that building, the police just arrived and intercepted him.

5.  The Defendant was arrested and admitted under caution that he intended to rob PW1’s mobile phone for resale as he only had $3 and he felt hungry.

6.  PW1 was sent to hospital for treatment and the medical finding was “ redness on nose”. She was discharged on the same day.

Record

7.  He has 2 convictions of thefts, in 2003 and 2008. In 2003, a 12 months PO orders was imposed, but he breached the PO order and was sentenced to Reformatory School. In 2008, he was sentenced to Rehabilitation Centre.

Mitigation

8.  He was just released from the Rehabilitation Centre 6 days before the commission of the present offence. Although his mother gave him a cash card to withdraw money from the bank, on the day in question, the bank machine took the card away. He was left without money. His mother also changed the door locked, he would not return home.

9.  The D said that he had been remanded in jail for 9 months already. He asked this Court to release him immediately. In his own letter, he realized that his family continued to support and also forgive him one time after the other. He asked this Court to give him an opportunity so that he can be reunited with his family.

Sentence

10.  This Court called a number of the reports before sentence.

11.  The Defendant is 20 years old, his parents divorced in 2000 when he was about 11 years old. Although his father has the custody of the defendant, he has to work to support the family. While his mother suffers from ill health, the Defendant was left without proper supervision.

12.  The probation officers and the social welfare officers have tried different programmes to help him, but all were unsuccessful.

13.  He has been to the Rehabilitation Centre, but the centre said that rehabilitation canter’s programmers do not benefit him any further. He was just released from the Rehabilitation Centre and committed this offence again.

14.  The probation officer described him as an “ an untamed outrageous young adult “

15.  All the reports said the same thing that the no one has control over him. He also has hot temper, he upset everyone, no one can get along with him. He does not respect the elders such as his parents’ girl-friend and boy-friend.

16.  However, the Young Offender Assessment Panel has just interviewed him and considered that “ it is necessary to bring in a long term disciplinary training programmer to drop him a deterrent effect and help him to build up an industrious life.”

17.  To this extend, I also agreed with the YOAP’s recommendation. The Defendant is ordered to be sentenced to Training Centre for the present offence.