HKSAR v. Tse Yee Ting, Jimmy

DCCC 348/2024

[2025] HKDC 1356

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 348 OF 2024

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "Robbery". He robbed a female sex worker after receiving service from her. He took away 2 iPhones and 1 Octopus card from her workplace.

Summary of Facts

2.X was a female sex worker running a solo operation in a 150 ft² cubicle in Yuen Long ("the Room").

3.About 5:35 a.m. on 19 December 2022, the defendant went to the Room and engaged X for her service.  The agreed price was $1,200.  After receiving the service, the defendant kept telling X that he was arranging for money transfer and asked X to wait.  He also gave X $100 cash and asked her to transfer $100 to his friend electronically.  X complied.

4.Afterwards, X repeatedly asked the defendant to pay up.  Suddenly, he hit X's face with an ashtray.  X immediately fell down.  The defendant then hit the back of X's head and her back with the ashtray and fled.  X later discovered that her 2 iPhones (which were placed on her bed; valued at $16,000 in total)  together with her Octopus card went missing.  The Police was alerted.

5.CCTV footage captured the defendant entering the Room at 5:31 a.m. and running out at 6:52 a.m. on 19 December 2022.

6.The Police arrested the defendant on 12 October 2023.  In an identification Parade held on 10 November 2023, X identified the defendant as the person who had attacked her with an ashtray and stolen from her.

Mitigation & Sentence

7.The defendant is 44.  He has 6 conviction records, which included 5 "Theft" offences, 1 "Criminal intimidation" offence and 5 driving-related offences.  Defence counsel Mr. So informed me that the defendant has a son (about 10 years old)  with his ex-girlfriend.  He married his wife in 2015.  Prior to his arrest, he was living with another woman.  He worked in the marble field earning about $25,000 per month.  In mitigation, Mr. So submitted that no weapon was used or pointed at X.  The defendant simply used an astray he found in the Room to hit X.  She did not sustain any serious injuries[1]. Mr. So suggested to treat this case as an unarmed robbery.

8.The Court of Appeal in HKSAR v Lai Kwok Fai CACC 346/2008[2] held that the work nature of sex workers made them vulnerable targets and convenient prey for robbers.  Thus, the court needs to protect sex workers by imposing deterrent sentences on their predators so that they are free of bullying[3].

9.The defendant in the present case did not pay for the sexual service provided by X. He tried to delay by pretending to arrange for payment. Upon being pressed by X for payment, the defendant picked up an ashtray and used it to hit her face, head and back. He then took away her 2 iPhones and an Octopus card and fled. What the defendant did was brutal and savage. I consider a starting point of 5.5 years' imprisonment just and appropriate. With the timely guilty plea, the sentence is reduced to 44 months. Apart from this, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further reduction. I sentence the defendant to 44 months' imprisonment.