HKSAR v. Leung Wing Fung

DCCC842/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 842 OF 2010

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant pleaded guilty to two charges of using a forged credit card and one charge of possessing two forged credit cards.

2.The offences were committed on 9 June 2010. The defendant on the afternoon of 9 June went to the Jusco Department Store in Whampoa Garden, Hung Hom. He selected a gold necklace valued at $7,236 and gave a forged credit card, the subject of the 1st charge, by way of payment. The card purported to be a ChaseFreedom Visa card and was in the name of the defendant.

3.Despite repeated efforts by the cashier, the cashier was unable to get the approval code for the transaction and the defendant took the card back and left. Mr Kwan alerted a security guard to what had taken place and the security guard kept the defendant under observation. The defendant then went to another department in Jusco. This was the Electrical Appliances Department. He selected a shaver valued at $2,798 and submitted the same ChaseFreedom Visa card by way of payment. The cashier was unable to get approval for the transaction and returned the card to the defendant, who then left the department store.

4.The defendant left the store and was immediately intercepted. He was searched and in his possession were found the two MasterCards the subject of the 3rd charge. They were found in the wallet of his trouser pocket.

5.The defendant said that he had been given the cards by a friend of his called Ah Shek on the day prior to the offences being committed. He said the price of the cards was $500 each but he had not yet paid Ah Shek. The three cards were all in the defendant’s name and they were forensically examined and found to be forged.

6.The defendant does not have the advantage of a clear record but his previous convictions are for drug-related matters. He has nothing for dishonesty. I have been told in mitigation that the defendant is 23. He was born in Hong Kong and educated to Form 4 standard. At the time of the offence he was unemployed. I understand that he had previously worked as a cook but had lost that job earlier in the year. He lives with his family. I was told that following the loss of his job he decided not to claim social security benefits, nor did he ask his parents for financial assistance. Sadly, his mother is sick. She has contracted cancer. All the family expenses have to be met by his father.

7.I am told in mitigation that the Ah Shek he referred to in his record of interview with the police was a friend he had met when he was previously in custody for the drug-related offences. He said he could supply him with forged credit cards.

8.In mitigation, it was urged upon me that there were no aggravating features of this case. The defendant was not part of a large syndicate, nor was there any international dimension to this matter. The goods he attempted to purchase were valued at $10,000, but no loss was suffered by the store, as both transactions failed. He now states that he is remorseful and asks for leniency.

9.I am told that his parents when they discovered his involvement in this matter were shocked and very concerned about the matter. A letter has been placed before the court by the defendant’s father. The defendant’s father said he felt bad, as the defendant was his only son and is very much loved. They did their best to bring him up in a proper manner and he was taken to church. He states that the problems with his son started when his son started to mix with people he should not have been mixing with. He refers to them as “bad peers”. He asked for leniency for his son.

10.Also submitted was a letter from the priest of a Tsuen Wan Pentecostal Church. He states that the defendant is a good young man and comes from a good family. He says the problem started for the defendant when he had difficulty with reading and studying and did not get the right education in Hong Kong and he started to mix with bad peers.

11.As counsel for the defendant has rightly acknowledged, the offences to which you have admitted are serious. The abuse of the credit card system is a major problem, not only in Hong Kong but worldwide, and courts are required to pass effective deterrent sentences.

12.I have considered the question of totality. The offences were committed on the same day and on the same occasion. For reasons which are not explained, the first two transactions failed. Had they been successful, I have no doubt that you would have gone on to use that card and the other two cards in your possession and the potential loss would be significant.

13.I take in respect of these offences a starting point of 3 years and I reduce that by one-third to reflect the guilty plea, so the sentence passed will be one of 2 years’ imprisonment. On Charges 1 and 2, the sentence will be 2 years’ imprisonment. On charge 3, I took a starting point of 2 years and reduce that by one-third to reflect the guilty plea. That would be a sentence of 16 months’ imprisonment and all the sentences to run concurrently.