HKSAR v. Tosaya Tomoko

DCCC453/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 453 OF 2012

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

Corrigendum

1.Whilst preparing the written reasons for verdict, I discovered that there were some clerical errors in my sentence.  The sentence should actually read as follows:

2.I understand that this was not a very sophisticated theft.  However, the amounts involved are substantial.  She was given access to the diamonds during out-of-work hours and clearly a high degree of trust was reposed in her.  The diamonds were pawned to feed her gambling habit.  Apart from her guilty plea, there is no mitigation.

3.In all those circumstances, for Charge 3, I adopt a starting point of 2 and a half years.  I give the defendant full credit for her guilty plea.  The sentence is reduced to 20 months.

4.For Charge 1, I adopt a starting point of 6 years.  I give the defendant full credit for guilty plea.  The sentence is reduced to 4 years.

5.As for Charge 2, I adopt a starting point of 9 months.  After giving the defendant full credit for her guilty plea, the sentence is reduced to 6 months.

6.Each of the charges involved different stones. They were committed at different times.  Technically, the sentences should be consecutive.  However, I have to take into consideration the principle of totality.  I order that 8 months of the sentence in Charge 3 to be served consecutively to Charge 1, the sentence to Charge 2 to be served concurrently to the two other charges.  That is a total sentence of 56 months. 

7.So it is just the numbers, the clerical errors.  It does not affect the actual sentence.