HKSAR v. Au Kai Wing

DCCC 416/2014

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 416 OF 2014

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of robbery.

2.In the afternoon of 19 March 2014, the female victim, aged 78, went to Fung Hing House, Hing Wah Estate to visit her daughter.  When reaching the staircase between the 19th and 20th floors, the defendant suddenly grabbed the victim’s neck from behind, he then snatched her handbag containing wallet with ID card, cash and mobile phone, and then he ran away.

3.The victim reported the matter to the police and was conveyed to Eastern Hospital for treatment after sustaining pain and tenderness over her neck and lower back.

4.However, the CCTV of the estate captured the footage of the defendant.  Immigration Watchlist was imposed.  When the defendant returned to Hong Kong from China on 26 March 2014, he was arrested.

5.Under caution and in the video-recorded interview the defendant admitted going to Hing Wah Estate on that day to visit a friend but in vain.  Later when he left by walking downstairs, he found the victim and robbed her.  He later took out the cash of 1,000 and discarded the handbag.  The defendant also confirmed as the person captured in the CCTV and he regretted committing the robbery and begged for a chance.  The movement record also confirmed that he was in Hong Kong during the time of offence.

6.The defendant is aged 50.  He has 3 previous similar convictions of robbery in 1987, 1999 and 2003, where in 2003 he was sentenced to 54 months’ imprisonment. His last conviction was in 2008, where he was sentenced to 14 days’ imprisonment for shoplifting.

7.Mr Lam for the defendant, submits that the defendant is divorced and working as a casual and delivery worker earning about 8,000 per month.  He has a gambling habit causing him to be in need of money.  Mr Lam particularly submits that the defendant was not aware of the age of the victim when seeing her back only, and while grabbing the lady by her neck, the defendant then released quickly and told the victim not to shout.  The medical report indicated the victim only suffered from minor injuries.

8.Mr Lam further relied on the case of R v Yau Kwok Tong CACC 17/1987 and HKSAR v Yiu Chi Ming CACC 472/2011, saying that for an unarmed robbery the starting point could be around 4 years’ imprisonment.

9.Robbery is a very serious offence.  The facts in the present case were serious in that an old-aged lady was the victim, and she also suffered from injuries.  No doubt the incident was so terrible to the victim.

10.As submitted, I also considered the appropriate starting point to be 4 years’ imprisonment. However, one must pay due regard that the defendant already had 3 previous similar convictions.  Obviously the past sentence could hardly prove deterrent at all.  For prevention of further repetition and in public interest, a higher starting point should be adopted, as indicated in the case of HKSAR v Chan Pui Chi [1999] 2 HKLRD 830.

11.However, taking into account the defendant’s guilty plea and saving court’s costs and time, I consider only 3 more months should be added.  Thereby the starting point shall be 4 years and 3 months’ imprisonment, to be reduced to 34 months upon guilty plea.

12.Therefore, the defendant shall be sentenced to 34 months’ imprisonment for this charge.