A DCCC226/2012 A
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
B HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION B
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 226 OF 2012
--------------------
C C
HKSAR
D D
v.
E Lui Wing-shing E
F F
--------------------
G Before: Deputy District Judge A Tse G
Date: 4 July 2012 at 11.26 am
Present: Mr Yaddy Cheung, Solicitor on fiat, for HKSAR
H Mr Cheung Chi-fai, Victor, instructed by Messrs Tso Au H
Yim & Yeung, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid,
I
for the Defendant I
Offence: (1) & (3) Falsely pretending to be a public officer (假
冒公職人員)
J (2) Theft (盜竊罪) J
(4) Robbery (搶劫罪)
K K
---------------------
L Reasons for Sentence L
M
--------------------- M
N 1. The defendant has pleaded guilty to four charges: two N
counts of falsely pretending to be a public officer, contrary to
O section 22(1) of the Summary Offences Ordinance, Cap.228, O
Charges 1 and 3; one count of theft, snatching, contrary to
P P
section 9 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap.210; and one count of
robbery, contrary to section 10 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap.210.
Q Q
R 2. At about 1.45 pm on 6 December last year, Law Tung- R
shing, PW1, aged 15, was walking past a supermarket in Old Main
S Street, Aberdeen, with his mobile telephone in his hand. The S
defendant suddenly grabbed PW1’s left hand and pulled him into a
T T
rear lane nearby.
U U
CRT22/4.7.2012/LT 1 DCCC226/2012/Sentence
V V
A 3. Inside the rear lane, the defendant told PW1 that he A
was anti-triad and asked PW1 who he followed. The defendant also
B inserted his hand into PW1’s trouser pocket and attempted to B
take out PW1’s wallet but his hand was pushed away by PW1. The
C C
defendant then asked to inspect PW1’s mobile telephone whilst
PW1 asked to see the defendant’s warrant card. The defendant
D D
suddenly snatched away PW1’s telephone valued at $2,500 and
E fled. PW1 then made a report to the police. E
F 4. At about 5 pm on 24 December, Yeung Yat-sing, PW2, F
aged 17, and Hui Wai-ki, PW3, aged 14, were playing electronic
G G
games in an amusement game centre in Old Main Street, Aberdeen,
when the defendant suddenly approached them.
H H
I
5. The defendant told PW2 and PW3 that he belonged to the I
anti-triad team and demanded to have a chat with PW2 outside.
J PW2 followed the defendant to a rear lane near the rear entrance J
of the game centre. Inside the rear lane, the defendant asked
K PW2 whether he had followed anyone. PW2 replied in the negative, K
whereupon the defendant suddenly punched PW2 in the abdomen once
L L
and ordered PW2 to take out all his properties. PW2 complied.
The defendant then snatched PW2’s I-phone and put it inside his
M M
shoulder bag.
N N
6. Suspecting that the defendant was not a police
O officer, PW2 tried to snatch back his I-phone. A struggle O
ensued. The defendant punched PW2’s left face about 10 times.
P P
Subsequently, PW2 managed to retrieve his telephone and fled.
Q Q
7. Later on the same day, PW2 and PW3 met the defendant
R again and reported the matter to the police. R
S 8. The defendant was arrested by the police on 2 January S
this year. Under verbal caution, the defendant admitted that he
T T
had been to the games centre at about 4 pm on 24 December and
that he had impersonated a police officer of the anti-triad unit
U U
CRT22/4.7.2012/LT 2 DCCC226/2012/Sentence
V V
A and asked a 16 to 17-year-old male to go to the rear lane with A
him. He admitted that he attempted to take away the teenager’s
B I-phone but the teenager resisted. He punched the teenager’s B
face several times and left. The defendant repeated the same
C C
confession in a subsequent video recorded interview.
D D
9. In another video recorded interview under caution the
E defendant admitted having stolen PW1’s mobile telephone. E
F 10. PW1 and PW2 attended an identification parade. The F
defendant was positively identified by PW1. PW2 failed to
G G
identify the defendant, however, the defendant said to the OC
Parade that he was remorseful for his wrongdoing and asked the
H H
court for leniency.
I I
The defendant’s record and mitigation
J 11. The defendant is aged 28. He is married and has two J
children, aged 6 and 3 respectively. His wife is aged 26 and has
K started to work as an odd-job worker in McDonald’s recently, K
earning about $6,000 per month. The defendant lives with his own
L L
family - his mother and a younger brother. His two younger
sisters are married and living apart.
M M
N 12. The defendant has three previous convictions, one of N
which was for theft and one for assault. He has been abusing
O various types of drugs since the age of 15 or 16 and has been O
experiencing psychotic features for over 5 to 6 years. He has
P P
been sentenced to DATC but he resumed taking drugs after
release.
Q Q
R 13. Counsel submitted that the defendant had committed R
these offences out of poverty. However, it appears that counsel
S is unable to argue against the fact that the defendant spends at S
least part of his money on drugs instead of his family. Counsel
T T
submitted that the defendant had impersonated a police officer
U U
CRT22/4.7.2012/LT 3 DCCC226/2012/Sentence
V V
A to minimise the resistance from the victims and thereby minimise A
the violence.
B B
Reasons for sentence
C C
14. The facts of this case are very serious. Impersonating
a public officer is in itself a criminal offence. The defendant
D D
committed Charges 1 and 3 in order to further other serious
E criminal offences. The facts of this case are at the highest end E
of this offence.
F F
15. I wholly disagree with counsel that the defendant had
G G
impersonated a police officer in order to minimise violence. It
was evidenced from the admitted facts in relation to Charge 4
H H
that the defendant resorted to violence at the outset before
I
there was any sort of resistance from PW2. I
J 16. For Charges 1 and 3, I adopt a starting point of J
6 months for each offence. The defendant has pleaded guilty; he
K is entitled to the full discount. The sentence is reduced to K
4 months.
L L
17. In Charge 2, the defendant snatched the telephone from
M M
PW1. There are sentencing guidelines for this type of case. For
N a person with a clear record, the appropriate starting point is N
12 to 15 months’ imprisonment. The defendant is not a person
O with clear record, he has one previous conviction for theft. He O
preyed on a youngster and impersonated a police officer to
P P
commit this offence.
Q Q
18. For Charge 2, I adopt a starting point of 18 months.
R The defendant has pleaded guilty; I give him full credit for his R
guilty plea. The sentence is reduced to 12 months.
S S
19. As for Charge 4, the defendant also impersonated a
T T
police officer to commit the offence and preyed on a youngster.
He committed multiple offences within the space of 3 weeks. I
U U
CRT22/4.7.2012/LT 4 DCCC226/2012/Sentence
V V
A adopt a starting point of 4 years. I give him full credit for A
his guilty. The sentence is reduced to 32 months.
B B
20. Charges 1 and 2 are part and parcel of the same
C C
incident. I order that the sentences for those offences to be
served concurrently.
D D
E 21. The incident for Charges 1 and 2 is wholly distinct E
from the incident in Charges 3 and 4. Technically, the sentences
F for Charges 3 and 4 should be wholly consecutive to the F
sentences of Charges 1 and 2. However, I have to take into
G G
consideration the principle of totality.
H H
22. I order that the sentences for Charges 1 to 3 to be
I
served concurrently. However, 8 months of Charge 2 will be I
served consecutively to Charge 4. That makes a total sentence of
J 40 months. J
K K
L L
(A Tse)
M M
Deputy District Judge
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
CRT22/4.7.2012/LT 5 DCCC226/2012/Sentence
V V
A DCCC226/2012 A
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
B HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION B
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 226 OF 2012
--------------------
C C
HKSAR
D D
v.
E Lui Wing-shing E
F F
--------------------
G Before: Deputy District Judge A Tse G
Date: 4 July 2012 at 11.26 am
Present: Mr Yaddy Cheung, Solicitor on fiat, for HKSAR
H Mr Cheung Chi-fai, Victor, instructed by Messrs Tso Au H
Yim & Yeung, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid,
I
for the Defendant I
Offence: (1) & (3) Falsely pretending to be a public officer (假
冒公職人員)
J (2) Theft (盜竊罪) J
(4) Robbery (搶劫罪)
K K
---------------------
L Reasons for Sentence L
M
--------------------- M
N 1. The defendant has pleaded guilty to four charges: two N
counts of falsely pretending to be a public officer, contrary to
O section 22(1) of the Summary Offences Ordinance, Cap.228, O
Charges 1 and 3; one count of theft, snatching, contrary to
P P
section 9 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap.210; and one count of
robbery, contrary to section 10 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap.210.
Q Q
R 2. At about 1.45 pm on 6 December last year, Law Tung- R
shing, PW1, aged 15, was walking past a supermarket in Old Main
S Street, Aberdeen, with his mobile telephone in his hand. The S
defendant suddenly grabbed PW1’s left hand and pulled him into a
T T
rear lane nearby.
U U
CRT22/4.7.2012/LT 1 DCCC226/2012/Sentence
V V
A 3. Inside the rear lane, the defendant told PW1 that he A
was anti-triad and asked PW1 who he followed. The defendant also
B inserted his hand into PW1’s trouser pocket and attempted to B
take out PW1’s wallet but his hand was pushed away by PW1. The
C C
defendant then asked to inspect PW1’s mobile telephone whilst
PW1 asked to see the defendant’s warrant card. The defendant
D D
suddenly snatched away PW1’s telephone valued at $2,500 and
E fled. PW1 then made a report to the police. E
F 4. At about 5 pm on 24 December, Yeung Yat-sing, PW2, F
aged 17, and Hui Wai-ki, PW3, aged 14, were playing electronic
G G
games in an amusement game centre in Old Main Street, Aberdeen,
when the defendant suddenly approached them.
H H
I
5. The defendant told PW2 and PW3 that he belonged to the I
anti-triad team and demanded to have a chat with PW2 outside.
J PW2 followed the defendant to a rear lane near the rear entrance J
of the game centre. Inside the rear lane, the defendant asked
K PW2 whether he had followed anyone. PW2 replied in the negative, K
whereupon the defendant suddenly punched PW2 in the abdomen once
L L
and ordered PW2 to take out all his properties. PW2 complied.
The defendant then snatched PW2’s I-phone and put it inside his
M M
shoulder bag.
N N
6. Suspecting that the defendant was not a police
O officer, PW2 tried to snatch back his I-phone. A struggle O
ensued. The defendant punched PW2’s left face about 10 times.
P P
Subsequently, PW2 managed to retrieve his telephone and fled.
Q Q
7. Later on the same day, PW2 and PW3 met the defendant
R again and reported the matter to the police. R
S 8. The defendant was arrested by the police on 2 January S
this year. Under verbal caution, the defendant admitted that he
T T
had been to the games centre at about 4 pm on 24 December and
that he had impersonated a police officer of the anti-triad unit
U U
CRT22/4.7.2012/LT 2 DCCC226/2012/Sentence
V V
A and asked a 16 to 17-year-old male to go to the rear lane with A
him. He admitted that he attempted to take away the teenager’s
B I-phone but the teenager resisted. He punched the teenager’s B
face several times and left. The defendant repeated the same
C C
confession in a subsequent video recorded interview.
D D
9. In another video recorded interview under caution the
E defendant admitted having stolen PW1’s mobile telephone. E
F 10. PW1 and PW2 attended an identification parade. The F
defendant was positively identified by PW1. PW2 failed to
G G
identify the defendant, however, the defendant said to the OC
Parade that he was remorseful for his wrongdoing and asked the
H H
court for leniency.
I I
The defendant’s record and mitigation
J 11. The defendant is aged 28. He is married and has two J
children, aged 6 and 3 respectively. His wife is aged 26 and has
K started to work as an odd-job worker in McDonald’s recently, K
earning about $6,000 per month. The defendant lives with his own
L L
family - his mother and a younger brother. His two younger
sisters are married and living apart.
M M
N 12. The defendant has three previous convictions, one of N
which was for theft and one for assault. He has been abusing
O various types of drugs since the age of 15 or 16 and has been O
experiencing psychotic features for over 5 to 6 years. He has
P P
been sentenced to DATC but he resumed taking drugs after
release.
Q Q
R 13. Counsel submitted that the defendant had committed R
these offences out of poverty. However, it appears that counsel
S is unable to argue against the fact that the defendant spends at S
least part of his money on drugs instead of his family. Counsel
T T
submitted that the defendant had impersonated a police officer
U U
CRT22/4.7.2012/LT 3 DCCC226/2012/Sentence
V V
A to minimise the resistance from the victims and thereby minimise A
the violence.
B B
Reasons for sentence
C C
14. The facts of this case are very serious. Impersonating
a public officer is in itself a criminal offence. The defendant
D D
committed Charges 1 and 3 in order to further other serious
E criminal offences. The facts of this case are at the highest end E
of this offence.
F F
15. I wholly disagree with counsel that the defendant had
G G
impersonated a police officer in order to minimise violence. It
was evidenced from the admitted facts in relation to Charge 4
H H
that the defendant resorted to violence at the outset before
I
there was any sort of resistance from PW2. I
J 16. For Charges 1 and 3, I adopt a starting point of J
6 months for each offence. The defendant has pleaded guilty; he
K is entitled to the full discount. The sentence is reduced to K
4 months.
L L
17. In Charge 2, the defendant snatched the telephone from
M M
PW1. There are sentencing guidelines for this type of case. For
N a person with a clear record, the appropriate starting point is N
12 to 15 months’ imprisonment. The defendant is not a person
O with clear record, he has one previous conviction for theft. He O
preyed on a youngster and impersonated a police officer to
P P
commit this offence.
Q Q
18. For Charge 2, I adopt a starting point of 18 months.
R The defendant has pleaded guilty; I give him full credit for his R
guilty plea. The sentence is reduced to 12 months.
S S
19. As for Charge 4, the defendant also impersonated a
T T
police officer to commit the offence and preyed on a youngster.
He committed multiple offences within the space of 3 weeks. I
U U
CRT22/4.7.2012/LT 4 DCCC226/2012/Sentence
V V
A adopt a starting point of 4 years. I give him full credit for A
his guilty. The sentence is reduced to 32 months.
B B
20. Charges 1 and 2 are part and parcel of the same
C C
incident. I order that the sentences for those offences to be
served concurrently.
D D
E 21. The incident for Charges 1 and 2 is wholly distinct E
from the incident in Charges 3 and 4. Technically, the sentences
F for Charges 3 and 4 should be wholly consecutive to the F
sentences of Charges 1 and 2. However, I have to take into
G G
consideration the principle of totality.
H H
22. I order that the sentences for Charges 1 to 3 to be
I
served concurrently. However, 8 months of Charge 2 will be I
served consecutively to Charge 4. That makes a total sentence of
J 40 months. J
K K
L L
(A Tse)
M M
Deputy District Judge
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
CRT22/4.7.2012/LT 5 DCCC226/2012/Sentence
V V