HKSAR v. Ting Chi Ho

Read the full judgment text of HCCC 251/2020 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 14 April 2021.

Case No.HCCC 251/2020[2021] HKCFI 2725
Court
High Court CFI
Date14 Apr 2021
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCCC 251/2020

[2021] HKCFI 2725

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 251 OF 2020

________________________

  HKSAR  
  v  
  Ting Chi-ho  

________________________

Before:  Hon M Poon J
Date:  14 April 2021 at 11.43 am
Present:  Ms Lilly Wong, SPP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
  Ms Vivian Wong, instructed by Damien Shea & Co, assigned by DLA, for the accused
Offence:   Robbery (搶劫罪)

________________________

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

________________________


COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty to one charge of robbery, contrary to section 10 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap 210.

Facts revealed that three robbers robbed the victim at knifepoint who was in the process of transporting a total of RMB 2 million from China to Hong Kong with his wife. The three robbers were each holding a knife, one pointed a knife at the victim’s neck and the other two pointed knives at the victim. One of them forcefully snatched and took away the travelling bag from the victim. The victim chased and kicked the robber causing the travelling bag to fall onto the ground. The victim held onto the bag but the three robbers tried to snatch it again.

At this point, the victim’s wife who was walking ahead returned and struggled with the robbers over the travelling bag, during which the robbers chopped the victim with their knives. The robbers took away the rucksack of the victim which contains RMB 370,000 and a mobile phone. They boarded a getaway car driven by the defendant and got off.

The injuries suffered by the victim was serious. He had multiple chop wounds causing deep lacerations over the right arm and left knee. His right index and the middle fingers were amputated which required replantation. The wife of the victim also sustained cut wounds on her left arm.

The defendant upon arrest later admitted his role as the driver of the car. He admitted to have driven the getaway car to the location and picked up the three robbers after the robbery.

The defendant is aged 31. He has six previous convictions involving 10 charges, the last in September of 2016 for trafficking in dangerous drugs. He was sentenced to 10 weeks’ imprisonment.

By way of mitigation, I was told that the defendant is married and he was father to a newly born child at the time of the offence. Being financially stringent, he was lured to earn quick money by agreeing to be hired for $5,000 to act as a driver to the other three men to the location and to drive them away. He claimed to have no participation or planning in the robbery and he did not see that the three men carried knives when they boarded the car. He also claimed not to be the mastermind and only realised the seriousness when he saw the three men struggling with the victims.

It was advanced on his behalf that by pleading guilty at the earliest possible instance, he showed genuine remorse. And he also offers his unreserved apology to the victims and promised to be a law-abiding citizen in the future. He hopes to resume his role as father to his young child as soon as possible.

In sentencing the defendant, I have taken into account the facts of the present case, mitigation advanced on his behalf by counsel and the sentencing guidelines. Since this is a robbery with knives, the Mo Kwong Sang guidelines are applicable.

This case contains the following aggravating features: physical violence was used for not just a split of second, there were struggling over the dropped travelling bag during which the victim was chopped; two victims were injured, the male victim’s injuries were serious; the stolen cash was never recovered; more than one persons was involved and all were acting in concert. Although it was advance on his behalf that he was not one of the robbers who carried a knife to rob the victim, it is trite that those who participate in the commission of an offence will, through the doctrine of joint enterprise, invariably share equal culpability. In the cases of Sin Wai Lun and Cho Chi Kin, lookouts and drivers of vehicles who knowingly conveyed the robbers to and from the scene are given as examples.

A starting point of 8 years is appropriate in the present case. He is entitled to the full one-third discount. He is sentenced to 5 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.