CRIMINAL CASE NO. 44 OF 2010
COURT: Lau Ho-ting, you have been convicted by this court, after trial, of the offence of attempted robbery.
At around noon, on 20 March 2008, you entered the ICBC Bank in Castle Peak Road, Tsuen Wan, approached a cashier and then took out from the rucksack you were wearing on the front of your body what appeared to be a pistol. You told the court that it was made of wood and that you had painted it black to look more realistic. I am prepared to accept that that is the case. You then slammed your hand on the counter and pointed this pistol-like object at the cashier demanding that she hand over money.
When she fled to the rear office you pointed the pistol-like object at her colleague at the next counter. She crouched beneath the counter and pressed the alarm button. You then left the bank and attempted to board a public light bus. You were arrested a year later.
Any attempt to rob a bank using an imitation firearm is a very serious offence. In normal circumstances, a person convicted of such an offence could expect a very long term of imprisonment. That is because it is a terrifying experience for those who are caught up in the incident and because there is always a risk that police or security guards might open fire believing that it was a real firearm and people might get hurt.
In your case, the circumstances are unusual. Over the past years your condition has deteriorated, both mentally and physically. I have heard that in 1993 when your IQ was tested, the full score recorded was 90, putting you in the upper range of low-average intelligence. When your overall IQ was tested again by Dr Cindy Chan in 2010, it had declined to 75 which she stated put you at the borderline range of intellectual functioning; lower than low intelligence and higher than mild grade retardation. Most of your intellectual abilities are in the below average to far below average range.
At the same time I am satisfied that your physical condition has deteriorated. At the time of the attempted robbery it is apparent that you were capable of walking without a stick, although from the evidence of the witnesses you were clearly not walking with an even gait. Now, you need the assistance with a stick in order to walk.
Although it is clear from the verdict of the jury that you intended to steal from the bank by putting the teller in fear of being subjected to force, having heard the evidence of Dr Cindy Chan I think it probable that although you knew you were doing wrong, you did not fully appreciate how serious your actions were. Dr Chan’s evidence was that, as a result of your mental disorder, you find it difficult to control your emotions and impulses. I consider that this may well have played a large part in this offence.
Dr Ephraem Tsui, the police psychologist, who was not ultimately called by the prosecution, took the view that your problems are much more than an issue of intelligence but are complicated by a brain disorder affecting your impulse and emotional control as well as personality.
I consider that to impose a sentence of imprisonment would not serve any rehabilitative purpose. Indeed, I consider it might have an opposite effect. However, that is not a course I would shrink from if I thought it was the only way of protecting the public. You have to realise that if you repeat conduct of this sort, the courts will have no choice but to put you somewhere where you cannot repeat such conduct and, almost certainly, that means prison.
This is the second time you have set out to rob using an imitation firearm. I understand the first occasion was in 1993 when you were put on probation for the offence of carrying an imitation firearm with intent to commit an arrestable offence. You had been found outside a bank with an imitation gun. 15 years later you have committed this offence. I have borne in mind that this offence occurred three years ago and that you were granted bail at an early stage.
You have been living with your mother who says there have been no other incidents of antisocial behaviour. Until August or September 2010 you were attending the Fu Hong Society Shek Wai Kok Sheltered Workshop. Since then you have been attending the Caritas Hong Kong Integrated Community Centre for Mental Wellness in Kwai Chung. You attend each week day and apparently work at simple paper‑cutting jobs. You are attending psychiatric follow up at West Kowloon Psychiatric Centre. Both psychiatrists who have examined you have said you should continue to do so.
If you agree, I propose to take a course which would enable you to continue to attend the centre and continue outpatient follow up but subject to the supervision of a probation officer. However, I must make it absolutely clear that the course I intend to take, if you agree, would enable you to be brought back to this court and dealt with again for this offence if you did not co-operate with the probation officer or you committed any further offence.
What I propose to do is to put you on probation for a period of 2 years. That would be subject to the following conditions. Now, please listen carefully to these conditions: the first is that you should be of good behaviour and keep the peace; secondly, that you should comply with all reasonable directions of your probation officer; thirdly, that you should work and reside as directed by your probation officer; fourthly, that you should attend such community centre sheltered workshop, or similar institution, as your probation officer directs; and, fifthly, that you should receive such outpatient treatment or other psychological treatment as your probation officer directs and take all medication prescribed by your doctors. Do you understand all those conditions?
ACCUSED: I answer understand.
ACCUSED: Yes, I will.
COURT: I want again to make it absolutely clear that if you commit any further offence or you fail to comply with the conditions, you are liable to be brought back to this court and dealt with again for this offence.
ACCUSED: Yes, I do.
COURT: Very well. This is a course that enables you to put the past behind you if you behave.
ACCUSED: Yes.
COURT: Very well. I make a probation order for 2 years on those terms. Do you need me to repeat them again? You have got them down now? He should be of good behaviour and keep the peace. He should comply with all reasonable directions of his probation officer. He should work and reside as directed by his probation officer. He should attend such community centre, sheltered workshop or similar institution as his probation officer directs and he should receive such outpatient or other psychological treatment as his probation officer directs and take all medication prescribed by his doctors. Perhaps I should rather say psychological or psychiatric treatment as his probation officer directs.