HKSAR v. So Yun Lam and Others

DCCC 1050/2015

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 1050 OF 2015

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.As far as Charge 1 is concerned, a robbery on 10 August 2015, all four defendants pleaded guilty to this offence.

2.On 13 August 2015, Charge 2, again a robbery, was committed by the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants. All pleaded guilty.

3.Charge 3 is a robbery committed on 27 August 2015 by the 1st, the 3rd and the 4th defendants, who have all pleaded guilty.

4.The last charge, Charge 4, a robbery, was committed on 29 August 2015, and the 3rd defendant pleaded guilty.

5.All four robberies were committed in under just three weeks.  The modus operandi of all four robberies is similar, all committed in the early hours of the morning.

6.Charge 1 was committed at 1.45 am, and the victim was a 49‑year-old male.  He was stopped, grabbed, punched, pushed to the ground, and his wallet taken.  In his wallet he had $3,600 cash, as well as an identity card and a bank card.  All four defendants, under caution, made a full admission.

7.Charge 2 was committed at about 3 am, and the victim was an 18-year-old male.  He was stopped, and told he owed money, and he gave $300 to the three defendants to avoid a beating.  However, his mobile phone was then snatched, and the defendants ran away.  It was not only the three defendants who robbed him. There were others, not identified nor arrested.  The 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants admitted, under caution, committing this robbery.

8.Charge 3 was a robbery that took place at 3.30 in the morning on 27 August.  The victim was a 50-year‑old man.  He was pushed from behind and fell forward.  His glasses came off.  His eyes were covered, and his wallet was stolen from his person.  The robbers then ran, and that victim saw four males running away.  He lost obviously his wallet, some cash, and his identity card.  Under caution, the 1st, the 3rd and the 4th defendants admitted robbing him.

9.Charge 4 was committed at 12.15 am, and the victim was a 34‑year-old man.  He was holding his mobile phone, when somebody tapped him on the shoulder.  He turned to see three males in front of him.  He was then punched, his phone was snatched, and the three men ran.  He was only able to identify the 3rd defendant, who admitted the robbery under caution.

10.The best mitigation was all four defendants’ pleas.  Robbery is a serious offence, and even when there is no weapon involved, a 4 to 5-year starting point would be appropriate.

11.Here, the robbers acted in concert together, at times, three to four.  Violence was used, and the victims assaulted.  The reason behind the robberies is that the defendants wanted some cash.  This was a way to make some fast money.

12.Because of the defendants’ young age, I called for reports after their pleas.  The 1st and 4th defendants are 19 years old, not that young.  The 2nd defendant was 14 at the time of the offences, and is now 15.  The 3rd defendant was and is 16.  As a result of mitigation I heard and the ages of the defendants, I called for various reports.  The 1st and 4th defendants I called for training centre and detention centre reports.  The 2nd and 3rd defendants I called for a probation officer, a rehabilitation centre, a training centre and a detention centre report.

13.Those reports set out - I do not intend to repeat their details - the defendants’ backgrounds and interviews in full.  It also includes details of conversations with defendants’ family members.

14.To conclude, the recommendations are as follows.  The 1st defendant, although suitable for both training centre and detention centre, the report recommends a detention centre order.

15.For the 2nd defendant, he is not suitable for detention centre because he is medically unfit. However, a rehabilitation centre or a training centre would be suitable. Ultimately, the report considers rehabilitation centre order the most suitable.  The probation officer is also of the view that the 2nd defendant could serve a probation order with stringent conditions.  That would include a 1-year residential training programme under the auspices of the St Stephen’s Society.  In fact, such a residential training programme would be a longer programme than rehabilitation centre.  However, that is not the only consideration I will take into account.

16.For the 3rd defendant, the probation officer was of the view that probation would not be appropriate. However, a period of detention in rehabilitation centre, detention centre and training centre would be available.  Ultimately, the report recommends the most suitable order would be a detention centre order.

17.For the 4th defendant, he is medically unfit for detention centre.  However, he is suitable for a period of detention in a training centre.  That is the only recommendation.

18.There are many family members, friends and social workers in court today to support the defendants. Clearly, the defendants’ families have not given up on the defendants.  I have many letters written on behalf of the defendants.  For the 1st defendant, his uncle and both his parents have written a letter.  For the 2nd defendant, a social worker and his father have written a letter.  He comes from a broken family in that his mother died when he was only 9 years old.  For the 3rd defendant, I have had letters from the defendant himself, his elder brother, and a social worker.  I have also seen a bundle of documents prepared by counsel that include his school reports and evidence of community service. The 3rd defendant comes from a broken family; his parents divorced when he was very young, and his mother singlehandedly raised five children.  For the 4th defendant, I have had letters from himself, his father and aunt.  His mother left the family when the defendant was only 2 years old.  He too has been raised in a broken family.

19.I accept from the letters I have read and the reports that I called for that all four defendants are remorseful.  I am sure all now are well aware of the seriousness of these offences as well as the need to change their lifestyle and behaviour.  If that does not change, all it means is the defendants will appear before a court again.

20.Defendants, please stand up.  After I have considered all four defendants’ pleas, mitigation put forward, compensation offered, the contents of all the reports, balanced against the seriousness of the facts and the charges, I have decided to follow the recommendation of the reports I called for.  This is a situation where, particularly for the 1st and 4th defendants, who are 19 years old, prison is not necessarily the only punishment available, but all must be aware that any further offending will likely result in prison being the only option.

21.I impose the following sentences.  For the 1st defendant, for Charges 1, 2 and 3, I impose a detention centre order for each charge, to be served concurrently.

22.For the 2nd defendant, for Charge 1 and Charge 2, I impose an 18‑month probation order concurrently with the following conditions.  The 2nd defendant shall work and study and reside as directed by the probation officer.  When he is living at home, he will remain at home between 9 pm and 6 am unless he is accompanied by his father or otherwise authorised by the probation officer.  Thirdly, he shall attend and complete not less than 12 months’ residential training programme as directed by the probation officer.  Lastly, he shall not associate with any person or groups of persons as directed by the probation officer.  2nd defendant, are you willing to comply with all those conditions?

2ND DEFENDANT: Yes.

23.I have to also warn you that if you breach any of those conditions, or the probation officer is not happy with your behaviour, that would mean a breach of this order, and the court will have the discretion to resentence you, and based on the reports, if you are not suitable for probation order, it will either be training centre or rehabilitation centre.

2ND DEFENDANT: I understand.

24.3rd defendant, you are sentenced, for Charges 1, 2, 3 and 4, for each charge, a detention centre order to be served concurrently. 

25.4th defendant, for Charge 1 and Charge 3, you are sentenced to a training centre order to be served concurrently.

26.I make the following compensation orders.  The 1st defendant is to pay to PW1 $925; $640 to PW2; and $140 to PW3.  That is a total of $1,705.  I will deduct $500 from bail, and the balance will be payable today.

27.The 2nd defendant will pay compensation to PW1 of $925; to PW2, $640.  That is a total compensation order of $1,565.  I will deduct $1,000 bail, and the balance is payable today.

28.3rd defendant, you are ordered to pay compensation to PW1 of $925; PW2, $640; PW3, $140; PW4, $3,300. That is a total compensation order of $5,005.  I will deduct the bail of $1,500, and balance payable today.

29.D4 is ordered to pay PW1 $925; PW3, $140.  That is a total compensation order of $1,065.  That amount is payable today.

COURT: Do you all understand the sentences and the compensation orders?

ALL DEFENDANTS: Yes, we do.