|
HCCC 222/2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CRIMINAL CASE NO 222 OF 2017
-----------------
-----------------
| Before: |
Hon Campbell-Moffat J |
| Date: |
21 September 2017 at 12.12 pm |
| Present: |
Ms Noelle A Chit, SPP(Ag) of the Department of Justice,
for HKSAR
|
| |
Mr Paul Leung, instructed by Tse Yuen Ting Wong,
assigned by DLA, for the accused |
-------------------------------------------------
Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case
-------------------------------------------------
COURT:
Mr Lee, you have today pleaded guilty to one count of robbery, contrary to Sections 10(1)(a) and (2) of the Theft Ordinance, Chapter 210.
The Summary of Facts was read out to you and you agreed that those facts formed the basis of your plea and those facts are very simple.
On 1 August 2016, in the late afternoon, you entered the Fubon Bank in Tuen Mun, wearing a mask and threatened two of the staff by splashing a flammable liquid over them whilst clearly holding a lighter. Then you demanded money from a third employee whilst also threatening that employee and intimating that she would be splashed with the liquid which could be ignited.
When that lady reacted by attempting to alert others, you threw some of the liquid onto the counter and held the lighter high so that it could be seen and you walked towards the two victims that you had already splashed with fluid. Everybody must have thought that you were going to set those people on fire, and your ploy worked because the lady at the counter gave you $40,000 in cash. Then you left.
Very luckily, there were no members of the public present. But you did put those members of the staff in fear for their safety. They did not know that you had emptied the lighter.
Mr Lee, you are a man of clear record and you had reached the age of 59 without committing any offence and, to all intents and purposes, being a valued member of your community. You were employed, married and you have a daughter. Your wife and daughter clearly love you and support you, as you do them. There was no obvious reason that I could see in the papers from your personal background as to why you should have committed this offence.
Mr Leung has told the court on your behalf that you had been a keen gambler over several years and that gambling led to loss which no doubt led to further gambling in the hope of erasing your losses. But over the years, those losses have accrued interest to the extent that you owed in the region of $86,000 to the bank and other institutions, some of which were putting considerable pressure upon you to repay those debts and I do imagine that that pressure would have been great indeed.
It is also clear from what Mr Leung says that you were not able to turn to anyone else to seek help for your problem. No doubt, as a loving husband and father, you felt ashamed of the position that you had got yourself into and your salary of just $10,000 per month was never going to get you out of the trouble you had gotten into.
Mr Lee, what you did was very wrong and you will be punished for that. But I do understand how you got into that position and how remorseful you feel about it. I note that you were apologising for your actions in the bank before you had even committed the offence. But you must remember that you will still nevertheless have terrified those employees.
I have been provided with HKSAR v Wong Wai Keung, CACC 25/2003 and I have also considered the reference in there to Attorney General v Man Yui To relied on by Ms Chit for the prosecution, and the case of HKSAR v Sher Hei Shing which was provided by Mr Leung on your behalf.
Bank robbery is considered a very serious offence. Robbery of a bank with a weapon such as a firearm, even an intimation one, or, in this case, a solvent which could be ignited, would normally attract a starting point for sentence, after trial, of between 12 and 15 years. But this could not been ignited because you made sure you could not do so even though the victims believed you could and so I believe that the correct starting point in all the circumstances of this case to be that of 11 years.
But unlike HKSAR v Wong, you are a man of clear record and are mature. You committed this offence out of desperation and you intended no harm. It is, as Mr Leung has said, totally out of character and therefore, in all the circumstances of this case, I believe that starting point should be reduced further to that of 10 years.
You will receive a one-third discount for your plea at the earliest opportunity and, Mr Lee, you will therefore go to prison for 6 years and 8 months.
|