Case Document

100%

DCCC 550/2015

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 550 OF 2015

____________

	HKSAR
	v
	LAU OI FU
____________

Before:

HH Judge Dufton

Date:

12 August 2015

Present:

Mr Matthew Leung, SPP, of the Department of Justice,
for the HKSAR.
Miss Ada Chan of S.H. Chan & Co
assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Defendant.

Offence:

Robbery (搶劫罪)

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

1.Lau Oi Fu you have pleaded guilty to one charge of robbery, contrary to section 10 of the Theft Ordinance, Chapter 210.

2.In summary at about 7 p.m. on the 9 May this year Ms Yip was walking along the rear lane at No. 115 Fuk Wa Street in Sham Shui Po when you snatched from behind her gold necklace and two pendants. Ms Yip immediately grabbed hold of her necklace and shouted “robbery”. You then pushed Ms Yip’s head against the wall and again snatched the necklace with force causing Ms Yip to fall to the ground. You then fled with a section of the necklace which had broken in the struggle. Ms Yip chased after you shouting “robbery” which attracted a passerby who intercepted you at the rear lane of No. 131 Fuk Wa Street. You were then seen to throw away a section of the necklace.

3.The case was reported to the police who arrived shortly afterwards. Under caution and in a subsequent video interview you admitted snatching the necklace because you were in financial difficulty.

4.Three sections of the necklace were recovered by the police together with one of the two pendants. The other pendant could not be found. The value of the necklace together with the two pendants was $12,000. Ms Yip sustained relatively minor injuries to her head, chest and right elbow for which she was treated and discharged from hospital the same day.

5.In passing sentence I have carefully considered everything said on your behalf by Miss Chan, including that as a result of injury at work you could no longer find employment and that you committed the offence out of financial difficulty because you had no money to pay your rent.

6.Although you cannot be given credit for a clear record I take into account that, apart from an offence in 2013 when you stole $600 left at an ATM machine and for which you were sentenced to 2 days imprisonment, you have been out of trouble for well over 20 years.

7.No knife or weapon having been used the proper basis for sentence is that which is appropriate for an unarmed robbery. The starting point for unarmed robbery is generally no more than 4 years imprisonment, see for example R v Yau Kwok Tung [1987] HKLR 782 as applied in HKSAR v Ting Chiu[2003] 3 HKLRD 378.

8.In HKSAR v Ku Kwok Wai & another CACC 14/2012 the defendants, who were 21 and 22 and of clear records, forcefully snatched an iPhone from a 17 year old female student in the early hours of the morning. The force used was a push in the back by one of the defendants whilst the other defendant acted as a lookout. The female suffered no injuries. The Court of Appeal agreeing this was a step-up from a theft or snatching upheld a starting point of 3 years and 3 months imprisonment.

9.I am satisfied the present case is also a “step up from a snatching” by reason of the fact that when Ms Yip held onto her necklace you pushed her against the wall and forcibly snatched the necklace causing Ms Yip to fall to the ground. The amount of force used was greater than that in Ku Kwok Wai and resulted in injuries to Ms Yip, although as noted these were relatively minor. Whilst in Ku Kwok Wai there were two robbers the Court of Appeal observed that from the perspective of the victim she would have only been aware of the presence of one robber.

10.Taking into account you acted alone and that relatively minor injuries were sustained by Ms Yip, I am satisfied the proper starting point after trial is 3 years and 6 months imprisonment. Giving you full credit for your plea of guilty you are convicted and sentenced to 2 years and 4 months imprisonment.