HKSAR v. Luo Xiuting

DCCC 801/2014

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 801 OF 2014

____________

____________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

____________

1.Luo Xiuting you have pleaded guilty to one charge of conspiracy to defraud, contrary to Common Law and punishable under section 159C(6) of the Crimes Ordinance, Chapter 200.

2.In summary around 7 a.m. on the 24 July this year Madam Cheung So Mui (aged 73) went to the playground, near where she lived in Kwong Yuen Estate, to do her morning exercise.  A female approached Madam Cheung asking the way to a doctor’s clinic.  Madam Cheung ignored the female at which point you approached and said you knew the way to the clinic and suggested that Madam Cheung accompany them to the doctors.

3.At this juncture a third female approached and asked Madam Cheung if she had suffered from any serious illness.  When Madam Cheung said she had problems with her eyes the three of you told Madam Cheung that an evil spirit would follow her and her son in the coming few days and that she would have no son to attend her funeral. 

4.The third female then told Madam Cheung that if she gave her money and jewellery she could perform a blessing ritual to drive away the evil spirit and that the more money Madam Cheung surrendered the better the effect would be.  On hearing this Madam Cheung went home and took 2 gold necklaces and a pendant valued at $17,500 together with $7,800 cash and an octopus card with about $200 stored value. 

5.Madam Cheung then went to Stewards Pooi Kei College in Shatin where she met you and the other two females.  You told Madam Cheung to take out the jewellery and money and put them in a black plastic bag which the third female appeared to tie up.  On being told the blessing ritual was performed and the evil spirit had left the third female gave the bag to Madam Cheung.  You told Madam Cheung not to open the bag until she returned home otherwise the blessing ritual would fail. 

6.Madam Cheung left and went to have tea.  On opening the bag Madam Cheung found only a bottle of water and a packet of sanitary napkins inside.  Realising she had been cheated Madam Cheung made a report to the police.  The jewellery and money have not been recovered.

7.In passing sentence I have carefully considered everything said on your behalf by Mr Chan, including you have a grandson to look after in the Mainland.

8.I take into account you have no previous convictions in Hong Kong.  This carries little weight where the offender is a visitor to Hong Kong.  The courts have said that coming to Hong Kong in order to commit crime and the commission of crime by visitors are aggravating features of sentence justifying an increase in the starting point (see for example HKSAR v Tan Meiyuan CACC 360/2008 and HKSAR v Aguilar Garcia Milner Javier CACC 485/2012).   

9.For similar offending the Court of Appeal have held that a starting point of 3 years is appropriate (see for example HKSAR v Liang Yaqiong & others [2009] 1 HKLRD 334 and the cases cited by Mr Chan).  In HKSAR v Tan Meiyuan the Court of Appeal said that in light of the nature of the offence and the effect on the victims 3 years might well be thought to be low bearing in mind also the aggravating feature of coming to Hong Kong specifically to commit the offences.

10.I am satisfied a starting point of 3 years is appropriate. Although you have been to Hong Kong before the travel records showing you came to Hong Kong the day before you cheated Madam Cheung the only inference to draw is that you came on this occasion to commit crime.  I increase the starting point by 3 months to take into account this aggravating factor.  Giving you full credit for your plea of guilty you are convicted and sentenced to 2 years and 2 months imprisonment.