HKSAR v. Yeung Yiu Tung

DCCC383/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 383 OF 2012

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant has pleaded guilty to one count of assault with intent to rob.

2.At around 1.35 am on 15 March this year, Miss Yuen Ho-yi, PW1, who was aged 21, alighted from a bus at Tin Shui Estate Bus Terminus.  She was on her way home alone.  When PW1 entered the lift of Shui Yee House in Tin Shui Estate, the defendant followed.  There were no other persons inside the lift.  At that time PW1 was holding an iPhone valued at $2,500 and was listening to music.

3.When PW1 walked out from the lift at the 10th floor, the defendant suddenly grabbed her neck from behind and covered her mouth.  PW1 struggled and the defendant fell on the ground.  PW1 shouted, ran home and reported the matter to the police.  In the meantime the defendant ran towards the rear staircase of the premises.  His image was captured by the CCTV.

4.At about 12.37 pm on the same day PC10032, PW2, saw the defendant in Tin Shui Wai.  PW2 recognized the defendant as the person captured by the CCTV footage.  Hence, he intercepted and arrested the defendant. 

5.Under verbal caution, the defendant claimed that he was attracted to PW1 and had previously approached her to court her.  His advances were rudely rejected by PW1.  He saw PW1 again on the material day and followed her into the lift.  He admitted that he had grabbed PW1’s neck when she got out of the lift but explained that he just wanted to talk to her.

6.In a subsequent record of interview, the defendant repeated the same explanation.  However, he later admitted that he was in debt when he saw PW1 on the bus with the iPhone, he decided to take the phone and sell it for money.  He followed PW1 into the lift, grabbed her neck and covered her mouth with intent to rob her of the iPhone.  He also admitted that his previous explanation was a lie.

The defendant’s background and mitigation

7.The defendant is now aged 29.  He was born in Hong Kong and completed Form 5 education.  His father passed away in 2007.  His mother suffered a stroke some years ago and is under the care of a relative. 

8.The defendant has 15 previous convictions, 10 of which related to dishonesty, 2 of which related to violence.  He was discharged from prison in mid February of this year, that is one month and two days prior to the commission of the present offence.

9.The defendant used to be an estate agent.  He had also been a leaflet distributor and transportation worker.  He lost his job shortly before the commission of the present offence.

10.Counsel explained that the defendant lacked social skills.  He could not hold down any jobs and was regularly in financial trouble.  The defendant lived alone in Yuen Long and his rental was $1,800.  In addition, he contributed $2,000 towards the support of his mother. 

11.Counsel submitted that the defendant committed the present offence out of momentarily greed and was remorseful.  The defendant lied to the police initially but later made a frank admission.  He has pleaded guilty at the first opportunity and counsel urged the court to be lenient.

12.The defendant has also written a letter urging the court to be lenient to allow him to take care of his mother. 

Reasons for sentence

13.I have considered the facts of this case, the defendant’s background and mitigation very carefully.

14.I agree with counsel that the facts of this case are serious.  The defendant preyed on a young girl in the early hours of the morning.  He followed her from the bus, grabbed her neck just as she got out of the lift.  The defendant has 10 previous convictions for dishonesty and 2 for violence.  He has been given many chances before.  He was sentenced to probation twice and suspended sentence twice, but he breached them on every occasion.  He committed this offence only one month after he was discharged from prison.  He has been going in and out of prison over the last 10 years. If he had any real intention to look after his mother, he should refrain from committing offences. 

15.I adopt 4½ years as a starting point.  I give the defendant full discount for his guilty plea, the sentence is reduced to 3 years.