HKSAR v. You Dunkui

Case No.DCCC 937/2010
Court
District Court
Date22 Sep 2010
Judge
Case Document
100%

DCCC937/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 937 OF 2010

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

  HKSAR  
  v.  
  You Dunkui  
----------------------
Before: H H Judge S D’Almada Remedios
Date: 22 September 2010 at 12.15 pm
Present: Mr Alvin Chui, PP, of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Mr Eddie Chan Chun-yee, of CY Chan & Co., assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Defendant
Offence:  (1) Burglary (入屋犯法罪)
(2) Remaining in Hong Kong without the authority of the Director of Immigration (在香港非法入境後未得入境事務處處長授權而留在香港)

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to two charges before this court. The 1st charge is a charge of burglary, contrary to section 11(1)(b) and (4) of the Theft Ordinance. The 2nd charge is remaining in Hong Kong without the authority of the Director of Immigration after having landed unlawfully in Hong Kong, contrary to section 38(1)(b) of the Immigration Ordinance.

2.You have admitted that on 25 June 2010, you remained in Hong Kong unlawfully, and on the same date you entered, as a trespasser, part of a building known as House A1, Flamingo Garden, No. 6 Fei Wan Road, Sai Kung, and stole therein seven watches, one camera, one mobile phone, eight wrist chains,

10 rings, some foreign currency, two MTR memorial tickets, some ornaments, a plastic box and a name-chop.

3.On the day in question, the resident, Madam Ting Wai-man, left her house at about noon, leaving her two grandchildren and three domestic helpers in the premises.

4.At about 8 pm, police officers received a report concerning a suspected burglary on those premises.  The officers went to the premises.

5.At about 8.30 pm, Madam Ting returned to the premises and the officers explained to her that a man had been found acting suspiciously on the premises.  The police officers were then instructed to seal up the premises.

6.The officers and Madam Ting entered the house and saw the grandchildren and the domestic helpers having dinner on the 1st floor at the time.

7.Madam Ting and the officers then searched the house and discovered that a window in her bedroom had been opened and that the room appeared to have been searched.

8.The officers and Madam Ting then ascended to another floor, and when they pushed the door open, they saw that you, defendant, were crawling out of the window at the time.

9.An officer then looked out of the window and saw you and another male in the back lane in the premises.  The other male got up on his feet and escaped, while you remained lying on the ground and did not move.  The officers then immediately ran to the back lane and got hold of you.

10.In a backpack lying on the ground beside you were the stolen items mentioned in the charge, and a pair of scissors, a saw, a pry bar and fastening tools. 

11.Madam Ting identified the property in the charge sheet as hers.  The jewellery found, she valued at approximately HK$26,700. She could not recall the value of the other stolen property.

12.You were arrested and cautioned, and under caution at the scene you said, “It hurts badly”.  You were injured and bleeding.  The officer therefore sent you to the hospital.

13.In a subsequent interview under caution, you admitted that you came from the Mainland and had illegally entered Hong Kong from Shenzhen with an acquaintance from your hometown called Deng Zheng Hui, by climbing the hills.

14.You also admitted that you and Deng intended to steal in Hong Kong and then return to the Mainland by illegal means.

15.Regarding the burglary, you admitted that you entered the premises via the balcony after climbing over a wall.  When you entered the premises, you searched for valuables and put them all in your backpack.  You were injured because you had climbed down the pipe of the house.  The pipe broke and you fell onto the ground along with part of the pipe.

16.You came to steal in Hong Kong because you were short of money, and the tools were brought by you and Deng to Hong Kong from the Mainland.

17.Mr Chan has mitigated fully on your behalf today and I have taken into account all that he has had to say.

18.You are aged 33 and have one previous conviction for possession of an ID card belonging to another, to which you were sentenced to 2 months’ imprisonment in August 2004.

19.You are married with two daughters, and your wife is a full-time housewife.  You are the sole breadwinner of your family.

20.Mr Chan has said the reason why you came to Hong Kong to commit this offence was because you were in need of money.

21.Your earnings in China as a taxi driver was approximately RMB1,500 a month.  However, you needed some RMB70 to 80 thousand for an operation on your daughter’s eye problems later this year.  As the amount was clearly beyond your means to pay, you were induced by Deng, the wanted person, to come to Hong Kong and burgle.

22.In the course of this burglary, Mr Chan has pointed out that you were injured.  You broke your arm and your leg, and I am told that you will suffer some permanent injury, although there is no medical evidence to support this.

23.Mr Chan has asked me, although he realises that there is clear law that for these two offences the sentences should be consecutive, to consider that there are humanitarian grounds to impose either a concurrent sentence or not a fully consecutive sentence.  He has relied upon the case of HKSAR v Lau Pang, CACC252/2004.

24.I have listened carefully to Mr Chan’s mitigation and to read your letter, which you have written to the court expressing your remorse and the reasons why you came here was because of your poverty and the lack of money for your daughter’s illness, and you are sincerely remorseful.

25.I do not see in this case to be any humanitarian factors at all.

26.You had deliberately planned to come to Hong Kong to burgle.  You came equipped with tools in your bag, together with another person, to commit this offence.

27.The fact that you committed this offence because you needed money for your daughter’s eye operation is not, I consider, a humanitarian ground to which the sentences should run concurrent. 

28.I also do not consider the injuries which you received as a result of you climbing out of the window and the pipe breaking to be any grounds for me to reduce the sentences to be imposed.  The injuries were caused as a result of your own wrongdoing.

29.As Mr Chan rightly points out, there are clear guidelines for these two offences. 

30.For the first offence of burglary, these are of domestic premises, the starting point is one of 3 years’ imprisonment. However, I give you full credit for your plea of guilty and reduce that term to 2 year’s imprisonment.

31.For Charge 2, of illegal remaining in Hong Kong, the guidelines are clearly that of 15 months’ imprisonment, after a plea of guilty.

32.Following the law, these sentences should run consecutive to each other. 

33.In the circumstances, you are sentenced to a total period of 3 years and 3 months’ imprisonment.

(S D'Almada Remedios)
District Judge