HKSAR v. Wong Cheung Wing

DCCC 13/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 13OF 2012

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

Charge and facts

1.The defendant pleads guilty to attempted theft.  Outside a vegetables stall on the First Floor of Pei Ho Street Market Building, Sham Shui Po, there were 4 – 5 customers one late afternoon.  He stood at 0.5 metre behind them and looked at their bags.  A police officer in plainclothes was on anti-crime patrol duty.  He kept an eye on him. 

2.A female customer there had her bag slung on the shoulder.  He zipped open the bag from behind and inserted his fingers inside.  She felt some movements and turned about, only to see him withdrawing his hand.  The police officer went up to arrest him for attempted theft.  Under caution he remained silent.  She suffered no loss.   

Defendant’spersonal background and mitigation

3.He is 59 years of age. He is unemployed and lives alone.  His aged mother is in China.  He has a daughter in the care of his ex-wife.  He has a voluminous record, including 15 thefts.  Among such thefts, there has been a continuous band of 7 pickpocketing convictions from 2001 to 2009.  He was sentenced to 14 months for the last one.  He is every inch a recidivist.   

Principles of sentencing

4.In HKSAR v Ngo Van Huy [2005] 2 HKLRD 1, the Court of Appeal laid down a guideline sentence of 12 to 15 months for pickpocketing after trial for a first time offender.  A heavier sentence would be imposed where there were aggravating factors (per Ma CJHC, as he then was, at p 7), which included:

(1) The offence committed in a place in which the public is at particular risk, such as crowded places like the MTR or the race course, crowded shopping areas where the pedestrian traffic is heavy;

(2) Repeat or persistent offending.

5.His attempt could have materialized but only ended because of the victim’s discovery.  No discount of sentence can be had for its incompletion (R v Vy Van-kien [1991] 1 HKLR 422).   

Sentencing this defendant

6.Although it was a straightforward pickpocketing, I have to factor in the elements of a crowded place and his recidivism so as to arrive at a proper starting point.  It has to be at least 2 years.  I give one-third discount for the plea of guilty.  There are no other mitigating factors.  His sentence is 16 months.