HKSAR v. Yeung Ka Kit Jonathan
|
DCCC 19/2013 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO. 19 OF 2013 ------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------- Reasons for Sentence ------------------------------- 1.The Defendant pleads guilty to 1 count of Burglary. 2.On 10th November 2012, the Defendant entered into St. Paul’s College, and stole from there 21 textbooks in the value of HK$2,520. The Defendant is an alumnus to the school. After stealing the books he went to a bookstore nearby and tried to sell them but was refused by the storekeeper. According to the Defendant, he then threw the books away. 3.The school found out that those books were missing and upon viewing the CCTV, the Defendant was spotted. Report was made to the police and the Defendant was arrested. Under caution, the Defendant admitted that he had entered the school on the relevant day but signed in with a false name. He denied stealing the books. 4.In an identification parade, the Defendant was identified by the storekeeper to be the person who offered to him the stolen textbooks on the day. 5.As I have intimated at the hearing, I sentenced the Defendant for a term of 20 months imprisonment in a previous burglary case in February 2012. He committed the present offence only 28 days from the completion of his previous sentence. 6.The facts of the previous case were similar to this one in which the Defendant had also stolen books from a school with a view to reselling them. In that case, I called for psychiatrist’s report, psychologist’s report and background report of the Defendant for consideration of sentence and both the psychiatrist and psychologist opined that no treatment to the Defendant was required. 7.I set out hereunder the backgrounds of the Defendant which I have done so in my Reasons for Sentence of the previous case. 8.The Defendant is 37 years old. He is a graduate from the Faculty of Arts of the University of Hong Kong. He was declared bankrupt in April 2009. He was convicted the offence of theft in October 2009 for which he was sentenced for a Community Service Order. He committed another offence of burglary in October 2010 and was sentenced to imprisonment for 16 months. In May 2011, he was convicted of the offence of Undischarged Bankrupt Obtaining Credit and was sentenced for 2 months’ imprisonment suspended for 18 months. 9.The Defendant came from a middle class family and received very good local educations. After graduation from the university, the Defendant tried different jobs and he was head of the administrative department of a company from 2005 to 2007. However, he quitted the job in 2007 and started to be a private tutor and freelance financial consultant. Like many other people, he suffered significant financial loss on investment in 2008 and was declared bankrupt in 2009. He was then became a dealer in used books. 10.The Defendant has a sad story about his deceased girlfriend. She was a teacher in an international school. They had plan of getting married. However, in 2002, after a heated argument with some school janitors in her school she fainted and was admitted into the hospital. She was found to have suffered from heart problems. She passed away in 2003 when she was then pregnant. The Defendant suffered depression as a result and developed hatred against school janitors. 11.In the previous case, the Defendant gave an excuse that he developed the idea of stealing books from schools as revenge as the janitors will be blamed for the loss of school properties. 12.In the present case, the Defendant has written a letter indicated to me that he is now very remorseful. His parents also submitted a letter to the court asking for leniency. 13.However, I am of the view that, even after the previous imprisonment the Defendant has still little insight to his problem. 14.The offence was obviously premeditated as he signed in with a false name. He entered his school only to steal books. There could be no other excuse for his deed other than greed. 15.After his arrest he denied the offence to the police. He has shown little remorse. 16.It is obvious that the previous sentence was not sufficient to deter the Defendant to commit similar offences. 17.The usual starting point for burglary of non-domestic premises is 2 ½ years imprisonment. In view of the repeated commission by the Defendant in similar mode of the offence. I would enhance the sentence for 4 months for personal deterrence on the Defendant. 18.On the other hand, credit should be given for the Defendant’s willingness to compensate the school for the loss of the books. I would reduce the sentence by 1 month for that making the total sentence to 33 months’ imprisonment. 19.Taking into account his guilty plea, the sentence is reduced to 22 months’ imprisonment. 20.I order that the Defendant do pay the school the amount of HK$2,520 as compensation within 7 days.
Please refer to CACC160/2013 for the relevant appeal(s) to the Court of Appeal. |