HKSAR v. Leung Bik Wai Betty

DCCC1055/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1055 OF 2009

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

HKSAR

v.

Leung Bik-wai Betty

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1. The defendant has pleaded guilty to one offence of theft and I have convicted her of that offence. 

2. The offence was committed on 24 August 2009 at a shop in Tuen Mun.  The defendant has agreed the facts, which establish that the theft was from a shoulder bag carried by the 1st prosecution witness.  The shoulder bag was unzipped by the defendant and $360 in cash, an Octopus card, a Visa card, ATM card and some other guide passenger membership card were missing.

3. The defendant was identified by use of CCTV recordings in the shop and the defendant admitted stealing the items set out in the charge.

4. The defendant has accordingly been convicted of a single offence of theft, being described as a pickpocketing offence.

5. The defendant is a 36-year old female and she is single.  She has a daughter aged 12 years old and lives with relatives, residing with her own father and her daughter.

6. The defendant’s antecedents statement and criminal record summary shows that she has spent considerable time in prison over the past few years and the defendant has committed a number of offences of theft.  There are 17 previous convictions and 16 of which are similar.

7. The defendant was first sent to prison as early as the year 2000 when she received 6 months’ imprisonment for offences of theft and she committed her first what was recorded as a pickpocketing offence, for which she received 12 months’ imprisonment, in the year 2001.  In 2002, for a number of theft offences, she was sent to Drug Addiction Treatment Centre.  She returned to prison again in 2004, on conviction of a number of theft offences and offences of possession of dangerous drugs.

8. In 2005 she received sentences of 10 months’ imprisonment for theft described as “pickpocketing” and in 2007 she was convicted of a number of offences of theft and appears on the record to have been sentenced to a total of 18 months’ imprisonment.  Her criminal record shows that between 7 August 2007 and 21 August 2008 she was imprisoned in respect of those offences, so a total of 12 months were actually served in prison.

9. The defendant is a person who has, over a number of years, persistently committed offences of theft and offences of pickpocketing.  She is described in her antecedents statement as being a drug addict.

10. In mitigation, she has presented a letter to me; tells me she is remorseful.  She believes that she acts compulsively and wants to change that.  She asks for a psychological report and background report because she wants to receive some treatment for her problems.  As far as her personal circumstances are concerned, her 12-year old daughter I am told is cared for by her younger brother in Tai Hang estate.

11. She has now been remanded in custody for some 4 months.

12. The factors mitigating the defendant’s sentence are that she is a mother of a 12-year old daughter and obviously one does not want to separate such a small family for too long a period.  However, in respect of this offence I must also consider that she is a persistent offender and lengthy sentences of imprisonment in the past have not deterred her from committing these offences.

13. There are no especially aggravating factors in this offence other than the persistence of it.  The normal sentence for theft involving pickpocketing would involve a starting point of between 12 to 15 months’ imprisonment and it is clear that sentences in that region have persistently been passed upon the defendant and they have not, so far, succeeded in deterring her from committing offences of this nature.

14. I am only dealing here with one offence involving the theft of not a large amount of property, but because of the persistence of the offence and the lack of success in deterrence I do feel that the starting point for sentence should be higher than one would normally adopt in these offences but not so high as to have a detrimental effect on the relationship between mother and daughter.

15. In respect of this single offence of theft I will adopt a starting point of 21 months’ imprisonment.  I will reduce that to 14 months’ imprisonment for her plea of guilty.  The sentence will be one of 14 months’ imprisonment.