COURT: Both defendants have pleaded guilty in the lower court to one count of conspiracy to rob and are now before me for sentence.
The facts briefly were that, on 22 November 2021, while the victim of the robbery was alone in his shop in Yuen Long, the 1st accused came along and pretended that she wanted to buy gold jewelleries or a diamond ring. The victim’s business was actually in gold recovery, that is, procuring second-hand gold jewellery from customers and reselling them to other gold recovery agents. So due to the nature of his business, he always had a large amount of cash with him.
While he was attending to the 1st accused, the 2nd accused entered the shop wearing a face mask, carrying a plastic bottle containing red liquid, which he splashed on the face of the victim, and then took away his Montblanc rucksack on the table of the shop. The rucksack was valued at $9,800 and the contents of the rucksack were valued at about HK$337,800 in total. Inside the rucksack was $320,000 in cash. There was also a wallet valued at $8,000. And also the victim’s personal identification documents and credit cards.
The 2nd accused, after grabbing the rucksack ran out of the shop chased by the victim, but the victim was unsuccessful in catching him. Fortunately, the red liquid which was splashed on the victim was found to contain glycerol and it did not cause any permanent harm to the victim.
Subsequently, police investigation led them to the 1st accused, who was living in a hotel. She had been living in that hotel since September 2021. And CCTV footages showed that sometime before the robbery, the 2nd accused had gone to her room. About 15 minutes later, both the 1st and 2nd accused together with a person called Choi Ching-lam came out of the room and boarded a taxi. And they went to the place where the shop was located.
Later on, after the robbery, the 1st accused returned to the room and then subsequently she was joined by the 2nd accused and Choi. After the 1st accused was arrested and cautioned, she claimed that she was instructed by the 2nd accused and Choi to disguise as a customer.
When the 2nd accused was arrested, under caution, he gave an account of the planning of the robbery and that this happened two days before the robbery. And he asserted in his interview to the police that it was really Choi who was the mastermind to plan this robbery. The 2nd accused also said that it was the 1st accused who gave him the red liquid to pour on the victim. And subsequently, he said inside the 1st accused’s room, each of the three of them got around HK$80,000 for their efforts.
And some thought was also given to the fact that if any of them were caught by the police, they should have a reserve created for bail money, so each of them then took out $10,000 to create a reserve for bail money in case any of them were arrested.
So the robbery of any shop is a serious offence. In this case, there was some planning involved. As the facts indicated from the 2nd accused, he said that the planning was two days before the robbery. And in order to divert the attention of the victim, the 1st accused was pretending to be a customer. The 2nd accused came into the shop and threw the red liquid on the victim, thus causing him surprise and fear at the same time. And that was the opportunity to grab the backpack and run away with it. So this is the well-planned robbery, and to show how well planned it was, they even planned for bail money in case any of them were arrested.
Now, I agree with counsel’s submissions that this was a robbery which cannot be viewed as having been committed with arms or weapons. I agree with the starting point as indicated by the Court of Appeal in the case of HKSAR v Ting Chu and Another [2003] 3 HKLRD 378, where the Court of Appeal suggested the starting point of 4 years’ imprisonment after trial.
There were many aggravating factors in this case in that the robbery took place in commercial premises. There were two persons committing the offence inside the shop with one mastermind who was not present at the scene, and the properties were never recovered, and it was well planned.
Ms Wong, on behalf of the 1st accused, had submitted in her mitigation that the 1st accused was finding it very difficult to cope financially and therefore she was tempted by greed to participate in this robbery. Whatever the motivation was, in effect, she did commit the robbery. She played her part in the conspiracy and she did, in the end, took the money that was taken from the robbery.
Ms Wong said that as far as the robbery was concerned no one was injured and that the duration of the robbery was short. And it is also submitted by Ms Wong that she was not the mastermind and that the 1st accused is remorseful and she has participated in educating herself and activities in the Correctional Services Department during her incarceration. Well, hopefully, the 1st accused has indeed turned over a new leaf.
In relation to the 2nd accused, Ms See has submitted that the 2nd accused is age 31 and he is remorseful in that he has pleaded guilty and that the red liquid he used on the victim was non-toxic and the victim did not suffer any injuries. And Ms See pointed out also that whilst in custody, he has sought to better himself, taking courses while he was in custody and he is also studying theology and plan to continue the course after his release from prison. I certainly hope so. I certainly hope the 2nd accused has seen the light of the day and will continue with his participation in his religious studies.
However, as I have said, this remains a very serious offence and the only mitigating factor I can see in this case is their early pleas. This was not the first offence for either of them. As I have indicated, the starting point for this offence of conspiracy to rob would be 4 years’ imprisonment and because of all the aggravating factors which I have set out, I would increase it by 18 months.
So giving a total sentence of 66 months and giving each defendant one-third off, the sentence will be reduced to 44 months, which is 3 years and 8 months.
I see no difference between the two accused so each accused will be sentenced to 3 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.