HKSAR v. NG KAI MING, JOSEPH

DCCC 962/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 962 OF 2012

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of burglary contrary to section 11(1)(a) and (4) of the Theft ordinance.

2.  You have admitted that on 13 August 2012 in Hong Kong you entered as a trespasser a flat on the 7th Floor, 6 Tam Kung Road, Kowloon City with intent to steal therein.  That flat was a residential premises occupied by its owners.

3.  At about 9 am on 13 August 2012 the owners had left their flat and switched on a security system before they left.  The security system included CCTV cameras and sensors.  The system would automatically send the owners a text message to their mobile phones if movement was detected in the flat.  At about 10.30 am that day the two owners received a notification from the security system.  When they viewed the CCTV recordings they noticed a male, subsequently known to be yourself, rummaging through the flat.  The case was then reported to the police.  The police arrived at the scene and surrounded the building in which the flat was located. 

4.  At about 10.35 am, you were seen to be climbing out of the flat.  You remained on the scaffolding on the 7th floor.  After some negotiations you then complied with the police directions and entered through a flat on the 8th floor of the building. 

5.  In the meantime, the police had seen throw a yellow construction helmet and a bag down below whilst you were on the scaffolding.  Inside the bag was a grinder as well as 24 blades to be used with the grinder.  When you were arrested you admitted that you had worn the yellow construction helmet and bought the bag with its grinder and blades. 

6.  You informed the police that you climbed up the scaffolding of the building and then used the grinder to break the window of the flat and gain access through the window of the flat.  You were about to use the grinder to open the safe inside the flat, however you heard some noise outside the main door and thus you fled.  You stated that you committed the burglary as you had no money for living. 

7.  The victims suffered no loss of property other than a broken window. 

8.  Mr Duncan Percy, your counsel, has mitigated fully and thoroughly on your behalf before me and I have taken into account all that he has had to say.  I have also taken into account the letters written by yourself, your wife, your son and your step-daughter as well as the letter submitted to me written by the Commissioner of Police.  The letter by the Commissioner of Police thanks you for reporting a case and doing your best for the community.

9.  The letters written by your family and yourself are letters in mitigation informing me about you as to your general character and you as a person. 

10.  You are 48 years of age and you have 24 previous convictions, 20 of those convictions are dishonesty related, two are for theft, 13 for burglary, four for robbery, one for going equipped for stealing, two for assault occasioning actual bodily harm and two for trafficking in dangerous drugs.

11.  Mr Percy has informed me and conceded that your record itself is not a rosy one.  He acknowledges that you have a long history of criminality and you are embarrassed about it.  What he had informed me is that since 2010 you tried to turn a new leaf since you left prison and had not committed any offences until this particular burglary.  You were, he tells me, led into this burglary because you had very high expenses in the range of somewhere between $40,000 to $50,000 a month, yet at the time, you were a casual worker as an electrician, earning approximately $500 a day.  As your income could not support your family expenses and because you had borrowed money to set up a shop, you resorted to crime to pay off your debts and expenses.

12.  Mr Percy asked me to take into account your plea of guilty showing your remorse.  He said no witnesses were called and the prosecution was informed of your plea of guilty long before the trial.  There were no aggravating factors in this particular burglary itself but he recognises that there is an aggravating factor in your previous criminal record.  He has asked me not to increase the starting point by anything more than six months.

13.  Clearly your previous record is an appalling record.  Since 1986 to 2008 you have been in prison almost continuously.  Your record reflects the severity of your crimes.  In 1985 you were sentenced to 7 years each on five burglary charges; you have two other offences to which you were sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment which was for robbery and trafficking.  Rightly I am not here to re-sentence you on any of those offences as you have already been punished for those.  However, what I do see here is that you have not had any regard to any of the previous sentences passed upon you for similar offences of burglary.

14.  The reason for committing this offence is no reason at all.  You have certainly bitten off more than you can chew.  Earning an income of $500 a day is impossible to subsidise or sustain an expense of $40,000 to $50,000 plus taking up more debt of $120,000. You had put yourself in deep water, if that account is at all true.

15.  In any event, it appears to me, as mentioned by the prosecution, you are the owner of a vehicle which shows to me that you have more than I was actually informed about.  You can be considered as a professional burglar.  You have been committing this offence as long as almost 30 years ago.  No prison sentence has deterred you from continuing to commit these offences again and again.

16.  It was quite fortuitous that these victims had installed the security system in their house such that the police were able to capture you more or less red-handed.  You are fortunate to have such a supportive family despite your wife, your son and daughter-in-law reflecting that you have been a bad person and a thief who has been sent to prison on so many occasions. 

17.  I accept this is a domestic burglary with no other aggravating factors save the factor, as I’ve previously mentioned, of your previous criminal record.

18.  The normal guideline sentence for domestic premises for burglary after trial is one of 3 years’ imprisonment.  I enhance that sentence by a further year to start at 4 years’ imprisonment as a starting point had I convicted you after trial because of your criminal record.  You have pleaded guilty, saved the court’s time and, in those circumstances, I shall reduce that sentence by one-third.  You shall be sentenced to 2 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.