CRIMINAL CASE NO. 107 OF 2010
COURT: Three accused, I have taken into account everything urged on behalf of each of you and I have taken into account the reports on the 1st and 3rd accused which I sent for and have received. I have given separate consideration to the sentence for each of you.
The 1st accused is now aged 16; the 2nd accused is now aged 21 and the 3rd accused is now aged 17.
The robbery took place on 18 October 2009. In pursuance to a joint enterprise to which each of you were parties, a woman who had been walking along the street at night was struck on the head with a bamboo pole which measured about 2.5 feet long and had a handbag taken from her. The handbag contained eight keys, some cosmetic items, a purse, a Hong Kong identity card, a China re-entry card, an Octopus card, $32.50 Hong Kong cash, a passbook and two bankcards, all belonging to the victim.
When the victim was taken to hospital the same night, her general condition was found to be satisfactory. There was no obvious wound to her head. She was treated and discharged within a few hours.
It was the 2nd accused who had suggested the robbery. It was he who supplied the masks which he and the 1st accused used and it was he who struck the victim.So his role is more serious than that of the other two accused. As for the other two accused, I do not think that the role of either of them can be considered more serious than that of the other of them.
As far as the 1st accused and the 3rd accused are concerned, the Training Centre Suitability Report on each of them says that he is mentally and physically fit for detention in a Training Centre, that there is a place available for him and that he is considered suitable for detention in a Training Centre.
I have considered the mitigation made on each of their behalf and, in my opinion, detention in the Training Centre is the appropriate sentence for each of them. I sentence each of them to detention in a Training Centre.
The 2nd accused has a bad record. He has a previous conviction for trafficking in dangerous drugs, three previous convictions for theft, one previous conviction for assault with intent to rob, and one previous conviction for robbery. In conformity with many decisions of the Court of Appeal, I regard them as constituting a record which calls for a higher sentence than would otherwise be called for.
This was an armed robbery by three persons in which a blunt instrument was used on the victim. All things considered, I adopt a starting point of 8 years' imprisonment for the 2nd accused. I have given consideration to everything that has been urged on your behalf by your counsel. The only real mitigation that is available to you is your guilty plea.
Giving you a full one-third discount for that plea, I sentence the 2nd accused to 5 years and 4 months' imprisonment.