HKSAR v. Chan Tsz Kin

DCCC 83/2015

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 83 OF 2015

____________

____________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

1.Chan Tsz Kin you have pleaded guilty to one charge of conspiracy to commit criminal damage, contrary to sections 60(1), 159A and 159C of the Crimes Ordinance, Chapter 200 (charge 1) and one charge of conspiracy to wound, contrary to section 19 of the Offences against the Person Ordinance, Chapter 212 and sections 159A and 159C of the Crimes Ordinance (charge 2).

2.In summary in the early hours of the 2 December last year together with two other males you went to the “Bliss Bar” in Sai Yeung Choi Street North in Mongkok in a private car bearing false number plates. 

3.While the car waited on the street the three of you entered the bar.  You were all wearing masks and armed with weapons.  You had a hammer.  One of the other two also had a hammer and the other one had a knife.  You told everyone not to move and then used the hammer to smash a TV screen hanging on the wall of the bar. The other male with a hammer hit the marble tables while the male with the knife stood on guard near the entrance of the bar. 

4.As the three of you were leaving the male with the knife fell backwards onto the ground outside the entrance of the bar.  A customer in the bar tried to subdue this male but was slashed with the knife causing lacerations to his left hand and chest. 

5.You assisted the male to escape by hitting the customer with the hammer.  The customer used his hands to prevent being hit at which time the male got up and ran to the car. You then ran in the opposite direction along Sai Yeung Choi Street North.  The customer chased after you and apprehended you at the junction with Boundary Street.  The other two males made good their escape in the same car.

6.The whole incident lasted less than 30 seconds and was captured on CCTV which I have had the benefit of viewing.  The cost of the damage to the television is $7,000 and the marble tables $3,000.

7.In passing sentence I have taken into account everything said on your behalf by Miss Tam together with your mitigation letter.  I take into account your young age and that you have a burst lung resulting in you feeling very tired.

8.You are presently serving a DATC order imposed in February this year for an offence of criminal damage.  The facts of that case reveal a very minor case of criminal damage.  I have also had the benefit of reading the DATC report in that case. 

Conspiracy to commit criminal damage

9.This was without doubt a very serious act of criminal damage which was clearly planned with the intention of disturbing the bar.  I am satisfied that a deterrent sentence is required.

10.In HKSAR v Cheung Tsz Lung & others DCCC 244/2013 I sentenced four defendants involved in similar acts of criminal damage.  One of the defendants was the driver of the getaway car (no false plates).  The other three alighted with one acting as a lookout while the other two used crowbars to smash the windscreen and side mirrors of the goods vehicle.  The repair cost to the goods vehicle was $9,830.

11.Considering the offence was planned, four persons were involved and the extent of the damage I took as my starting point 2 years and 6 months imprisonment.  Leave to appeal against sentence was dismissed in HKSAR v Rana Wasif Saleem CACC 15/2014.

12.Taking into account this was a planned action involving a getaway car with false plates; three persons were involved wearing masks and all armed with dangerous weapons; and the extent of the damage I am satisfied a starting point of 2 years and 6 months imprisonment is also appropriate.  Giving you full credit for your plea of guilty reduces the sentence to 1 year and 8 months imprisonment. 

Conspiracy to wound

13.Clearly by all being armed with dangerous weapons you intended to use them if you were prevented from damaging the property or from making good your escape.  The CCTV shows all three of you using your weapons when trying to leave. 

14.Fortunately the injuries sustained by the customer are not more serious and from which he has made a full recovery.  The extent of the wounds can be seen in photographs 15-21 submitted to court. 

15.Taking into account all three of you were armed, one with a knife, I am satisfied this falls within a high level of seriousness.  Giving allowance that there may be more serious cases for example where there are more serious injuries or permanent injury, I am satisfied the proper starting point after trial is one of 2 yearsimprisonment.  Giving you full credit for your plea of guilty reduces the sentence to 1 year and 4 months imprisonment.

Totality

16.Clearly the two offences arise out of the same incident however they are separate offences and sentence must reflect that not only was property damaged but one of the customers of the bar was wounded.  I am satisfied 8 months of the sentence on charge 2 is to be served consecutively and 8 months concurrent to the sentence imposed on charge 1.  This makes a total sentence to be served by you of 2 years and 4 months imprisonment which I am satisfied properly reflects your criminal culpability on the two charges.  You are convicted as charged and sentenced to 2 years and 4 months imprisonment.