HKSAR v.ZHOU CHAI SHING AND ANOTHER

DCCC 562/2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 562 OF 2013

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  D2, you have pleaded guilty to two offences of burglary and each contrary to section 11(1)(b) and (4) of the Theft Ordinance, Cap 210, and you have also admitted two offences of remaining in Hong Kong, having landed unlawfully, contrary to section 38(1)(b) of the Immigration Ordinance, Cap 115.

2.  You, D1, have admitted one offence of burglary and one offence of unlawful remaining in Hong Kong, contrary to the relevant legislation as I have already mentioned.

3.  You have each admitted the Brief Facts and I have convicted you on each charge.

4.  Charge 1 is against you, D2.  The land in question is Lot No. 19B, Ha Pak Nai, Ping Shan, Yuen Long.  It is surrounded by a fence 1.6 metres in height, and on this land, there are two single-storey premises.  Both are occupied by the Tsui family, the parents of Mr Tsui living in one of the units.

5.  At about 3.27 pm on 14 January last, Mr Tsui’s mother, Miss Kam Sau-ching, saw three men running away from the door of Tsui’s house.  Investigation revealed a broken window with the bedroom of Tsui’s house being ransacked.  A watch valued at $5,980 was found missing after the incident.

6.  A fingerprint of you, D2, was found on an iPhone carton box in the bedroom.  In fact, you, D2, were one of the three men who burgled the house.

7.  Charge 2, unlawfully remaining against you, D2.  D2, you previously landed in Hong Kong and remained here unlawfully on 14 January of this year when you committed the first offence.  After commission of the offence, you returned to the mainland.

8.  Charge 3, burglary against both of you, Defendants.  Sometime before 3.40 am on 5 March last, Hot Square Brands, a shop at No. 23, No. 58 Lee Garden Road, Causeway Bay, was burgled.  The burglar alarm was set off.  You two and other unknown men were seen carrying large black plastic bags when you boarded the light goods vehicle.  You all left the scene in that light goods vehicle which is No. NW3791.  43 handbags, 11 wallets, a cosmetic bag, four scarves and one piece of accessory valued in total at $2,437,960 were stolen.

9.  The LGV, a stolen vehicle, was driven to Kowloon side where it collided with a road sign at the road junction between Battery Street and Nanking Street at Yau Ma Tei.  You two, Defendants, and other unknown men got out of the vehicle and tried to flee.  You two, Defendants, were arrested by the police close to the crash.  The others managed to escape.

10.  D1, under caution, you admitted that you had taken part in the burglary.  You stated that there were five of you involved in the burglary and while waiting outside the shop with three black bags, the three other culprits had gone into the shop to steal the goods and put them into three black bags.  The five of you then left.

11.  In a later video-recorded interview, under caution, you admitted that a friend named Ah Cheong had arranged for you to come to Hong Kong to find a job, and he had given you a mobile phone and told you to ring a specific number when you reached Hong Kong where someone would pick you up.  This you did and it was arranged for you to take part in this burglary which is Charge 3.  You expected a reward for your part.

12.  Admission under caution by you, D2, in respect of Charge 3.  Under caution, you admitted that the burglary in Charge 3 was committed by you and you were responsible for putting the bags into the light goods vehicle.

13.  In a later video-recorded interview, under caution, you admitted that a friend, one Lo Sam, in the mainland had invited you to go to Hong Kong and told you that someone in Hong Kong would arrange a job for you.  You would get $10,000 for helping to take some bags.  Before the commission of Charge 3, you received a call from the driver.  You were picked up in Tsim Sha Tsui and driven to Causeway Bay.  The driver showed you the shop, and you were told to get the bags then and returned to the vehicle.  You said you saw one of the culprits cutting the locks of the shop and putting the cut locks into the vehicle.  You carried a large black bag containing handbags.  There were five of you involved.

14.  Charge 4, the unlawfully remaining against you, D1.  You admitted under caution that you arrived in Hong Kong at about 9 am on 4 March 2013 by climbing over the mountain and unlawfully remaining here. 

15.  Charge 5, unlawfully remaining against you, D2.  Under caution, you admitted you unlawfully arrived in Hong Kong at about 12.30 am on 3 March by swimming.  You remained here without the authority of the Director of Immigration.

16.  D1, you are a person of clear record.  D2, you admitted to seven previous convictions on five occasions, five of which were similar to the 2nd charge and the 5th charge.

17.  D1, on your behalf, Mr Wu entered mitigation.  He stressed your immediate co-operation with the police on arrest for Charge 3.  This admission was repeated and embellished in a later video-recorded interview under caution.  Referring to your personal circumstances, he told me you are 39 years of age, single and a hawker in Shenzhen.  You are educated to the equivalent of Hong Kong level form F3. You barely make ends meet in Shenzhen.  You have no siblings and your parents are dead.  Mr Wu stressed that the premises in respect of Charge 3 were commercial premises and that all goods were recovered and returned to their owners.  He also stressed your plea of guilty and clear record.  He asked me for leniency and to consider applying the totality principle even though the normal sentencing policy is to impose the sentences consecutively.

18.  Mr Ma then entered mitigation for you, D2. He stressed your remorse as demonstrated by your plea of guilty and co-operation with the police, that the premises in Charge 3 were commercial premises and all goods were recovered.  He said you agreed with the antecedent report which shows you are 36 years of age, married with a son of 12; that on your instructions, you had indicated from a very early stage that you intended to plead guilty.  In respect of the premises involved in Charge 1, he stressed that whilst these were domestic premises, the offence took place in the afternoon, not in the early hours of the morning. 

19.  Mr Ma again stressed your plea of guilty and your remorse.  He asked me to show as much leniency as possible and apply the principle of totality.

20.  I turn now to the sentences.  Common by way of mitigation to all charges is your plea of guilty and your co‑operation with the police from an early stage.  It may have been purely fortuitous but the fact of the matter is that all goods in respect of Charge 3 were recovered.  The common aggravating features in respect of Charge 3 especially and in respect of Charge 1 are the fact that there was more than one perpetrator; In respect of Charge 3, the goods were of relatively high value.

21.  D1, you are a man of hitherto clear record.  In respect of you, D2, I do note that you have an appalling record, especially one for the commission of unlawfully entering and remaining in Hong Kong. 

22.  The following sentences will be imposed.  D1, taking all matters into account, on Charge 3, I take a starting point of 30 months’ imprisonment reduced to 20 months.  Charge 4, under unlawfully remaining, I will impose the normal sentence of 15 months and that will be imposed consecutively, making a total of 35 months’ imprisonment.

23.  D2, on the 1st charge, that is burglary of a dwelling house, I take a starting point of 36 months’ imprisonment reduced to 24.  In respect of Charge 2, you are a persistent offender, a recidivist. You have committed this offence many times before.  Therefore, I will impose a sentence of 21 months’ imprisonment consecutive.

24.  Charge 3, that being commercial premises, I take a starting point of 30 months reduced to 20 months.  To reflect the principle of totality, 10 months will be consecutive and 10 months concurrent.  That makes a sentence of 55 months.

25.  And in respect of the final charge being Charge 5, again to apply the principle of totality, I will impose a sentence of 21 months but that will be wholly concurrent.  So you will go to prison for 55 months.