HKSAR v. Kwok Wai Lam
|
DCCC 95/2013 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO 95 OF 2013 ----------------------
--------------------- Reasons for Sentence --------------------- 1.Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to two offences of theft, contrary to section 9 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap.210; two offences of burglary, contrary to section 11(1)(b) and (4) of the same ordinance; two offences of obtaining by deception, contrary to section 17(1) of the ordinance; and one offence of going equipped for stealing, contrary to section 27(1) of the ordinance. You admitted the brief facts and I convicted you. 2.Briefly what happened is this. On 2 November of last year at 11.22 pm outside a restaurant on the 1st Floor, Fortune Plaza, No. 4, On Chee Road, Tai Po, which is Premises 1, PC 10569, PW6, and other officers noticed you pulling a trolley and acting suspiciously. They intercepted you and conducted a search. From the trolley (Exhibit 1) they found a crowbar, a chisel, metal frame and two pairs of gloves (Exhibits 2 to 5). A body search revealed a mobile phone (Exhibit 6). 3.Under caution you admitted you intended to burgle a shop in Fortune Plaza using Exhibits 2 to 5 (Charge 7). You also admitted to a burglary on 16 October of that year of Yat Tung Technology, Shop 41B, Ground Floor, Fortune Plaza, which sold mobile phones (Charge 2), and on 31 October of that year the staff room of Premises 1 (Charge 3). You admitted to using a stolen credit card from Charge 3 to purchase Exhibit 6 on 31 October. That was Charge 5. You were then arrested. 4.A video recorded interview was conducted under caution subsequently and you repeated your admissions. You admitted using the same stolen credit card to purchase the mobile phone (Charge 5) on 31 October 2012. You admitted to stealing Exhibit 1 outside Tai Po Complex, 8 Heung Sze Wui Street, on 1 November 2012 when it was behind a domestic helper who was chatting (Charge 6), and Exhibits 2 to 5 were stolen from a construction site in October 2012 near YATA Department Store, Tai Po Mega Mall Zone B (Charge 1). 5.The offence for Charge 2 occurred in a shop selling mobile phones. On 16 October a security guard (PW2) found the premises of a window broken. A member of staff then confirmed five mobile phones worth $11,500 to be missing. CCTV showed a man in goggles walk towards the shop at 6 am and then leave at 6.10 am carrying a shoulder bag and a recycle bag. You admitted you had sold the phones and spent the money. 6.For offence 3, a member of staff placed her handbag in a locker in Premises 1 on 31 October 2012 at 5.30 pm. She left the locker secure. She returned at 9.30 pm to find it prised and the handbag gone. CCTV footage showed a man enter at 8.57 pm and leave with the handbag. The handbag contained the items listed in the charge. 7.For Charge 4, you used the credit card to purchase Exhibit 6 for $4,800 from CHEAPY shop. That is to be found in Mei Wing Building, Tai Po. 8.For Charge 5, you used the credit card to purchase the mobile phone for $5,689 from Telecom Digital at Ching Fat Building, Tai Po. You then sold it for $3,000. 9.You admitted to a substantial criminal record - 23 convictions on 11 appearances, 13 of which involved dishonesty. 10.Mr Tsui entered mitigation on your behalf. He told me that you are 46 years of age, a divorcee, living with your father and stepmother. Your father is in poor health suffering from lung problems. He is in need of constant care. Until 2 years ago you had worked as an assistant chef in a restaurant, earning some $9,000 to $10,000 per month. The restaurant unfortunately had closed and you had been unable to find work since. You were not in receipt of CSSA and you were in dire need of money. This is the motive for the offences. 11.Whilst acknowledging your poor record, Mr Tsui emphasised your plea of guilty and co-operation with the police. He stressed the saving of police and court time. He said you were now resolved to commit no further offences and wanted to get back to your father to assist with his care upon release. He urged me to consider the principle of totality when sentencing you, pointing out that Charges 1, 6 and 7, 3, 4 and 5 were interconnected. He urged me to be lenient with you. 12.I turn now to the sentence. 13.This is quite a catalogue of offences committed by a man with a substantial criminal record, especially one relating to dishonesty. I accept that you were extremely co-operative with the police, and also I note that you acknowledged your guilt from the outset. Indeed, as far as I can see that is the only mitigation. However, I do apply the principle of totality. I do recognise that whilst there are seven offences, it is in reality three courses of conduct and I accept what Mr Tsui says about interconnection between the charges I have mentioned. I have therefore been as lenient as I can consistent with my public duty. 14.Burglary and misuse of credit cards are regarded quite rightly as serious offences by the court. The following sentences will be imposed. 15.On the first offence I take as a starting point 6 months’ imprisonment, reduced to 4; that of course is theft. 16.Charge 2, burglary, I take as a starting point 30 months’ imprisonment, these being commercial premises, reduced to 20 months for your plea of guilty. This is to be served consecutively to the period in Charge 1. 17.Charge 3, another burglary, I take a starting point of 30 months’ imprisonment, reduced to 20 months for your plea of guilty, to be served concurrently. 18.Charge 4, which is obtaining by deception, 36 months’ imprisonment, reduced to 24 months for your plea of guilty. 18 months will be consecutive and 6 months will be concurrent. 19.Charge 5, obtaining by deception, 36 months’ imprisonment reduced to 24 months for your plea of guilty, will be served concurrently. 20.Charge 6 and Charge 7, the same sentences, 3 months reduced to 2 months on each, to be served concurrently. 21.Unless I fall into error, that I make to be 42 months to be served in prison, 3½ years.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||