A A
B B
DCCC 856/2015
C IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE C
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
D D
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 856 OF 2015
E ____________ E
F F
HKSAR
G
v G
LAW KA LEUNG
H ___________ H
I Before: HH Judge Dufton I
Date: 28 December 2015
J J
Present: Mr Simon Kwong, PP, of the Department of Justice,
for HKSAR
K Mr Charles Chu on 20 November and 28 December and K
Mr Hau Pak Sun on 10 December, of Charles Chu & Kenneth
L Sit assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant L
Offences: (1) Theft (盜竊罪)
M (2) Resisting arrest with imitation firearm (以仿製火器拒捕) M
N REASONS FOR SENTENCE N
O 1. Law Ka Leung you have pleaded guilty to one charge of theft, O
contrary to section 9 of the Theft Ordinance1, and one charge of using an
P P
imitation firearm with intent to resist lawful arrest or detention, contrary
Q to section 17(1) of the Firearms and Ammunition Ordinance 2 , the Q
maximum sentence for which is life imprisonment.
R R
S S
T 1
T
Cap 210.
2
Cap 238.
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
2. Full particulars of the offences are set out in the facts
C admitted by you on 20 November 2015 as supplemented orally in court by C
Mr Kwong and Mr Hau on 10 December 2015.
D D
3. In summary on 20 July this year you snatched a smartphone.
E E
Mr Co, the owner of the phone, wanted to buy a screen protection sticker
F for his phone. When Mr Co placed his phone on the counter of a stall on F
Sai Yeung Choi Street South in Mongkok you snatched the phone and
G G
fled.
H H
4. Mr Co chased after you. A sketch showing the route you
I I
took has been submitted to court. After passing City Link Mr Co saw you
J holding a black gun, which you pointed to the ground and fired twice. J
Believing the gun was an air pistol and not a real gun Mr Co continued to
K K
chase after you.
L L
5. On reaching the junction with Dundas Street Mr Tsang, a
M M
passer-by, joined in the chase on hearing Mr Co shout “snatching”. You
N ran all the way to the rear staircase of Mongkok Metro at which time you N
threw Mr Co’s phone on the ground.
O O
6. When Mr Tsang caught up with you at the rear staircase you
P P
put up a fierce struggle during which you told Mr Tsang you had a gun
Q and fired twice at his stomach. Mr Tsang, feeling he was not hit by the Q
gun, pulled you out of the rear staircase. At the same time Mr Co arrived
R R
and recovered his phone.
S S
7. You suddenly pushed Mr Tsang and fled again. Mr Tsang
T T
chased after you and pushed you on the ground. The police arrived and
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
arrested you. Mr Tsang was injured in the struggle. Mr Tsang’s injuries
C are shown in the photographs submitted to court. I am told Mr Tsang C
however did not seek medical treatment for his injuries.
D D
8. Subsequent examination of the gun revealed this to be a
E E
pressurized carbon dioxide powered air gun designed to discharge 4.5mm
F calibre metal balls with muzzle energy less than two joules. Photographs F
of the air gun have been submitted to court.
G G
H 9. CCTV capturing part of the chase along Sai Yeung Choi H
Street South and in the rear staircase of Mongkok Metro have been played
I I
in court. A synopsis of the CCTV images has also been submitted to
J court. J
K K
Mitigation
L L
10. In passing sentence I take into account everything said on
M your behalf by Mr Chu and Mr Hau together with the mitigation letters M
and the content of the psychiatric; psychological and DATC reports. The
N N
reports detail a history of drug abuse and drug induced psychosis. You
O are presently receiving treatment in the DATC and considered suitable to O
continue with the treatment programme. As I indicated during the hearing
P P
on 20 November the DATC report was called for to provide the court with
Q more detail about your drug abuse and not in contemplation of making a Q
further DATC order. The offences to which you have pleaded guilty are
R R
far too serious for the imposition of a DATC order.
S S
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
Theft
C C
11. There is no evidence before the court that this was anything
D other than an opportune theft. For example there is no evidence that you D
were paying attention to shoppers, waiting for the moment when one of
E E
3
them was not paying attention to their property . Nevertheless this
F remains a serious offence. Although the phone was valued at only $799, F
the loss of a mobile phone causes substantial inconvenience to the owner.
G G
I am satisfied the proper starting point after trial is 9 months
H imprisonment4. H
I I
12. You are a persistent offender having appeared in court on
J eighteen occasions since 1996, amassing a total of twenty three J
convictions, six of which are for dishonesty. Your persistence is shown by
K K
the fact that the present offences were committed whilst you were on bail
L in KCCC 1794/2015 for offences of violence and drugs, the case papers of L
which I have read. You were sentenced to DATC which order you are
M M
now serving5.
N N
13. The commission of offences on bail is an aggravating feature
O O
of sentence. Taking this into account together with your persistent
P offending I increase the starting point by 3 months to 12 months P
imprisonment. Giving you full credit for your plea of guilty reduces the
Q Q
sentence to 8 months imprisonment.
R R
S S
3
See HKSAR v Ng Ah Shan [2015] 1 HKLRD 783
T 4
T
This is the same starting point taken in HKSAR v Chui Chi Wai, DCCC 354/2010 cited by Mr Chu.
5
Sentenced to DATC on 11 September 2015.
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
Using an imitation firearm with intent to resist lawful arrest
C C
14. There are no guidelines. In my view deterrent sentences are
D required not only to deter the individual but also to deter those persons D
like-minded to use firearms, real or imitation, in the course of crime or in
E E
resisting lawful arrest.
F F
15. Mr Chu has very helpfully referred the court to three cases6,
G G
where starting points of between 5 to 6 years imprisonment were held
H appropriate for offences concerning the use of imitation firearms. In only H
one of the cases cited, Secretary for Justice v Lee Chun Ho, Jeef, was there
I I
a charge of using an imitation firearm with intent to resist lawful arrest or
J detention. In each of the cases cited the firearm was used in the J
commission of either a robbery or blackmail whereas you did not take out
K K
the air gun in the course of the theft.
L L
7
16. In the cases referred to the court by Mr Kwong the firearm
M M
was possessed with intent to commit an arrestable offence, which is an
N offence contrary to section 18(1) of the Firearms and Ammunition N
Ordinance and also carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. On
O O
being asked whether the prosecution accept there is no evidence you were
P carrying the air gun for use in crime, Mr Kwong replied that the court can P
draw that inference from the fact shortly after you snatched the phone you
Q Q
pulled out the gun. I am not satisfied this is the only inference to draw.
R R
S S
6
R v Yu Tai Wing [1995] 2 HKCLR 119; Secretary for Justice v Lee Chun Ho, Jeef [2009] 6 HKC
T 471; and HKSAR v Khan Ashraf CACC 360/2009. T
7
Attorney General v Lam Wing Kwong [1993] 2 HKCLR 227 and HKSAR v Chen Peihong CACC
479/2004.
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
17. I am told you use the gun for playing war games and that you
C were taking the gun for repair. When you were arrested you told the C
police that you were taking the gun to a repair shop for fitting BB bullets
D D
and air injection. You also told both the psychiatrist and the clinical
E psychologist you were taking the gun for repair. There is some support for E
this in that when the gun was seized no pressurized gas or metal balls were
F F
found and that as noted earlier when you fired the gun at Mr Tsang he did
G not feel he was hit by the gun. G
H 18. The theft was an opportune theft. Had the theft shown a H
degree of premeditation, for example pickpocketing, a court may be able
I I
to draw the inference the gun was carried either for use in crime or for
J J
resisting lawful arrest. Further, I take into account that in taking the air
K
gun for repair you may have been acting under the influence of psychosis. K
L 19. Accordingly I proceed on the basis that you were carrying the L
gun for repair and not for use in crime. The production of a gun in a busy
M M
shopping area nevertheless remains a very serious offence. In Secretary
N for Justice v Lee Chun Ho, Jeef, the Court of Appeal said the fact that the N
firearm is just an imitation firearm makes little difference as victims and
O O
police officers may not appreciate that it is an imitation firearm8.
P P
20. In this case Mr Co realised that the gun was an air gun and
Q Q
not a real gun. Mr Tsang having felt nothing when the gun was fired at
R him continued to subdue you. There is also no evidence the public were R
alarmed by what happened. Having viewed the CCTV, although difficult
S S
T T
8
§23 of the judgment.
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
to see whether you were holding the gun in your hand throughout the
C chase, it would appear you were not pointing the gun at anyone. C
D 21. Taking into account all the circumstances of the case D
including that the air gun was an imitation gun; in an attempt to escape
E E
you twice fired the gun, first when being chased by Mr Co and second
F when you struggled with Mr Tsang at the rear staircase of Mongkok Metro; F
Mr Co realised the gun was an air gun and not a real gun; no pressurized
G G
gas or metal balls were found; and that the gun was not used in the course
H of the theft or carried by you for use in crime; I am satisfied that the H
proper starting point after trial is 3 years imprisonment. Giving you full
I I
credit for your plea of guilty reduces the sentence to 2 years imprisonment.
J J
Mental disorder
K K
L
22. The psychiatric and psychological reports show that you have L
suffered from mental illness for over twenty years with five admissions to
M M
psychiatric hospitals in 2001, 2006, 2011, 2012 and 2014. Both the
N psychiatrist and the clinical psychologist are of the opinion that you suffer N
from drug induced psychosis. The clinical psychologist is of the opinion
O O
that your offences appear to be related to your long standing drug abuse
P and substance-induced psychosis and that your risk of reoffending is P
assessed to be moderate9.
Q Q
23. In HKSAR v Chiu Peng, Richard 10 the Court of Appeal
R R
accepted that a court may properly allow a discount in sentence where a
S defendant is suffering from mental illness which played a part in the S
T 9
T
See §§5, 6 & 10 of the psychiatric report and §§ 8, 14 & 15 of the psychological report.
10
[2002] 1 HKC 401.
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
commission of the offence. The court said the justification for a discount
C in sentence by reason of mental illness was: C
D “…as a reflection of diminished criminality or culpability on the D
part of the accused who has committed a crime under an
E E
abnormal state of mind. He knew that it was wrong to commit the
crime, but he did not appreciate that the commission was as
F F
serious as it was: the degree of culpability was thus lessened.”
G G
24. Chiu Peng, Richard was cited in HKSAR v Chen
H Xuehui11where the court reduced the sentence imposed after trial where the H
I
defendant suffered from Bipolar Affective Disorder and displayed florid I
symptoms at the time of the offence. McMahon DHCJ in Chen Xuehui
J J
said that in determining whether the illness has affected one’s culpability
K
for the offence requires an assessment of the nature and severity of the K
illness and an appreciation of the relevance of its symptoms to the
L L
commission of the offence.
M M
25. You told both the psychiatrist and the clinical psychologist
N that you had consumed ice and hypnotics the night before the offences. N
You told the psychiatrist that you heard a male voice telling you to put
O O
your toy gun in your bag when going to Mongkok to purchase hypnotics.
P Similarly you told the clinical psychologist that you had placed the gun in P
your bag days before on the instructions of a voice telling you to take the
Q Q
gun for repair. You also told the clinical psychologist when you walked
R by a retail shop you heard a hallucinated voice telling you to steal12. R
S S
11
HCCC 19/2012.
T 12
T
See §8 of the psychiatric report and §§ 10 & 11 of the psychological report.
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
26. Although you may have been acting under the influence of
C psychiatric illness at the time of the offences this was self induced by your C
continuous abuse of drugs. Whilst sympathetic to anyone suffering from
D D
mental illness I am satisfied in the circumstances there should be no
E further discount on account of the fact you may have been acting under the E
influence of drug-induced psychosis at the time.
F F
Totality
G G
H 27. Mr Chu asks that a concurrent or largely concurrent sentence H
be imposed. As pointed out earlier unlike the cases cited by Mr Chu
I I
where the imitation firearm was used in the course of the crime and
J therefore taken into account when sentencing for that offence, you did not J
use the air gun in committing the theft.
K K
L
28. The two offences are therefore separate and distinct. I am L
satisfied wholly consecutive sentences are appropriate making a total
M M
sentence of 2 years and 8 months imprisonment, which I am satisfied
N properly reflects your culpability on both charges. N
O Sentence O
P P
29. You are convicted and sentenced as follows
Q Q
Charge 1 – 8 months imprisonment; and
R R
Charge 2 – 2 years imprisonment consecutive to charge 1.
S S
(D. J. DUFTON)
T T
District Judge
U U
V V
A A
B B
DCCC 856/2015
C IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE C
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
D D
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 856 OF 2015
E ____________ E
F F
HKSAR
G
v G
LAW KA LEUNG
H ___________ H
I Before: HH Judge Dufton I
Date: 28 December 2015
J J
Present: Mr Simon Kwong, PP, of the Department of Justice,
for HKSAR
K Mr Charles Chu on 20 November and 28 December and K
Mr Hau Pak Sun on 10 December, of Charles Chu & Kenneth
L Sit assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant L
Offences: (1) Theft (盜竊罪)
M (2) Resisting arrest with imitation firearm (以仿製火器拒捕) M
N REASONS FOR SENTENCE N
O 1. Law Ka Leung you have pleaded guilty to one charge of theft, O
contrary to section 9 of the Theft Ordinance1, and one charge of using an
P P
imitation firearm with intent to resist lawful arrest or detention, contrary
Q to section 17(1) of the Firearms and Ammunition Ordinance 2 , the Q
maximum sentence for which is life imprisonment.
R R
S S
T 1
T
Cap 210.
2
Cap 238.
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
2. Full particulars of the offences are set out in the facts
C admitted by you on 20 November 2015 as supplemented orally in court by C
Mr Kwong and Mr Hau on 10 December 2015.
D D
3. In summary on 20 July this year you snatched a smartphone.
E E
Mr Co, the owner of the phone, wanted to buy a screen protection sticker
F for his phone. When Mr Co placed his phone on the counter of a stall on F
Sai Yeung Choi Street South in Mongkok you snatched the phone and
G G
fled.
H H
4. Mr Co chased after you. A sketch showing the route you
I I
took has been submitted to court. After passing City Link Mr Co saw you
J holding a black gun, which you pointed to the ground and fired twice. J
Believing the gun was an air pistol and not a real gun Mr Co continued to
K K
chase after you.
L L
5. On reaching the junction with Dundas Street Mr Tsang, a
M M
passer-by, joined in the chase on hearing Mr Co shout “snatching”. You
N ran all the way to the rear staircase of Mongkok Metro at which time you N
threw Mr Co’s phone on the ground.
O O
6. When Mr Tsang caught up with you at the rear staircase you
P P
put up a fierce struggle during which you told Mr Tsang you had a gun
Q and fired twice at his stomach. Mr Tsang, feeling he was not hit by the Q
gun, pulled you out of the rear staircase. At the same time Mr Co arrived
R R
and recovered his phone.
S S
7. You suddenly pushed Mr Tsang and fled again. Mr Tsang
T T
chased after you and pushed you on the ground. The police arrived and
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
arrested you. Mr Tsang was injured in the struggle. Mr Tsang’s injuries
C are shown in the photographs submitted to court. I am told Mr Tsang C
however did not seek medical treatment for his injuries.
D D
8. Subsequent examination of the gun revealed this to be a
E E
pressurized carbon dioxide powered air gun designed to discharge 4.5mm
F calibre metal balls with muzzle energy less than two joules. Photographs F
of the air gun have been submitted to court.
G G
H 9. CCTV capturing part of the chase along Sai Yeung Choi H
Street South and in the rear staircase of Mongkok Metro have been played
I I
in court. A synopsis of the CCTV images has also been submitted to
J court. J
K K
Mitigation
L L
10. In passing sentence I take into account everything said on
M your behalf by Mr Chu and Mr Hau together with the mitigation letters M
and the content of the psychiatric; psychological and DATC reports. The
N N
reports detail a history of drug abuse and drug induced psychosis. You
O are presently receiving treatment in the DATC and considered suitable to O
continue with the treatment programme. As I indicated during the hearing
P P
on 20 November the DATC report was called for to provide the court with
Q more detail about your drug abuse and not in contemplation of making a Q
further DATC order. The offences to which you have pleaded guilty are
R R
far too serious for the imposition of a DATC order.
S S
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
Theft
C C
11. There is no evidence before the court that this was anything
D other than an opportune theft. For example there is no evidence that you D
were paying attention to shoppers, waiting for the moment when one of
E E
3
them was not paying attention to their property . Nevertheless this
F remains a serious offence. Although the phone was valued at only $799, F
the loss of a mobile phone causes substantial inconvenience to the owner.
G G
I am satisfied the proper starting point after trial is 9 months
H imprisonment4. H
I I
12. You are a persistent offender having appeared in court on
J eighteen occasions since 1996, amassing a total of twenty three J
convictions, six of which are for dishonesty. Your persistence is shown by
K K
the fact that the present offences were committed whilst you were on bail
L in KCCC 1794/2015 for offences of violence and drugs, the case papers of L
which I have read. You were sentenced to DATC which order you are
M M
now serving5.
N N
13. The commission of offences on bail is an aggravating feature
O O
of sentence. Taking this into account together with your persistent
P offending I increase the starting point by 3 months to 12 months P
imprisonment. Giving you full credit for your plea of guilty reduces the
Q Q
sentence to 8 months imprisonment.
R R
S S
3
See HKSAR v Ng Ah Shan [2015] 1 HKLRD 783
T 4
T
This is the same starting point taken in HKSAR v Chui Chi Wai, DCCC 354/2010 cited by Mr Chu.
5
Sentenced to DATC on 11 September 2015.
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
Using an imitation firearm with intent to resist lawful arrest
C C
14. There are no guidelines. In my view deterrent sentences are
D required not only to deter the individual but also to deter those persons D
like-minded to use firearms, real or imitation, in the course of crime or in
E E
resisting lawful arrest.
F F
15. Mr Chu has very helpfully referred the court to three cases6,
G G
where starting points of between 5 to 6 years imprisonment were held
H appropriate for offences concerning the use of imitation firearms. In only H
one of the cases cited, Secretary for Justice v Lee Chun Ho, Jeef, was there
I I
a charge of using an imitation firearm with intent to resist lawful arrest or
J detention. In each of the cases cited the firearm was used in the J
commission of either a robbery or blackmail whereas you did not take out
K K
the air gun in the course of the theft.
L L
7
16. In the cases referred to the court by Mr Kwong the firearm
M M
was possessed with intent to commit an arrestable offence, which is an
N offence contrary to section 18(1) of the Firearms and Ammunition N
Ordinance and also carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. On
O O
being asked whether the prosecution accept there is no evidence you were
P carrying the air gun for use in crime, Mr Kwong replied that the court can P
draw that inference from the fact shortly after you snatched the phone you
Q Q
pulled out the gun. I am not satisfied this is the only inference to draw.
R R
S S
6
R v Yu Tai Wing [1995] 2 HKCLR 119; Secretary for Justice v Lee Chun Ho, Jeef [2009] 6 HKC
T 471; and HKSAR v Khan Ashraf CACC 360/2009. T
7
Attorney General v Lam Wing Kwong [1993] 2 HKCLR 227 and HKSAR v Chen Peihong CACC
479/2004.
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
17. I am told you use the gun for playing war games and that you
C were taking the gun for repair. When you were arrested you told the C
police that you were taking the gun to a repair shop for fitting BB bullets
D D
and air injection. You also told both the psychiatrist and the clinical
E psychologist you were taking the gun for repair. There is some support for E
this in that when the gun was seized no pressurized gas or metal balls were
F F
found and that as noted earlier when you fired the gun at Mr Tsang he did
G not feel he was hit by the gun. G
H 18. The theft was an opportune theft. Had the theft shown a H
degree of premeditation, for example pickpocketing, a court may be able
I I
to draw the inference the gun was carried either for use in crime or for
J J
resisting lawful arrest. Further, I take into account that in taking the air
K
gun for repair you may have been acting under the influence of psychosis. K
L 19. Accordingly I proceed on the basis that you were carrying the L
gun for repair and not for use in crime. The production of a gun in a busy
M M
shopping area nevertheless remains a very serious offence. In Secretary
N for Justice v Lee Chun Ho, Jeef, the Court of Appeal said the fact that the N
firearm is just an imitation firearm makes little difference as victims and
O O
police officers may not appreciate that it is an imitation firearm8.
P P
20. In this case Mr Co realised that the gun was an air gun and
Q Q
not a real gun. Mr Tsang having felt nothing when the gun was fired at
R him continued to subdue you. There is also no evidence the public were R
alarmed by what happened. Having viewed the CCTV, although difficult
S S
T T
8
§23 of the judgment.
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
to see whether you were holding the gun in your hand throughout the
C chase, it would appear you were not pointing the gun at anyone. C
D 21. Taking into account all the circumstances of the case D
including that the air gun was an imitation gun; in an attempt to escape
E E
you twice fired the gun, first when being chased by Mr Co and second
F when you struggled with Mr Tsang at the rear staircase of Mongkok Metro; F
Mr Co realised the gun was an air gun and not a real gun; no pressurized
G G
gas or metal balls were found; and that the gun was not used in the course
H of the theft or carried by you for use in crime; I am satisfied that the H
proper starting point after trial is 3 years imprisonment. Giving you full
I I
credit for your plea of guilty reduces the sentence to 2 years imprisonment.
J J
Mental disorder
K K
L
22. The psychiatric and psychological reports show that you have L
suffered from mental illness for over twenty years with five admissions to
M M
psychiatric hospitals in 2001, 2006, 2011, 2012 and 2014. Both the
N psychiatrist and the clinical psychologist are of the opinion that you suffer N
from drug induced psychosis. The clinical psychologist is of the opinion
O O
that your offences appear to be related to your long standing drug abuse
P and substance-induced psychosis and that your risk of reoffending is P
assessed to be moderate9.
Q Q
23. In HKSAR v Chiu Peng, Richard 10 the Court of Appeal
R R
accepted that a court may properly allow a discount in sentence where a
S defendant is suffering from mental illness which played a part in the S
T 9
T
See §§5, 6 & 10 of the psychiatric report and §§ 8, 14 & 15 of the psychological report.
10
[2002] 1 HKC 401.
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
commission of the offence. The court said the justification for a discount
C in sentence by reason of mental illness was: C
D “…as a reflection of diminished criminality or culpability on the D
part of the accused who has committed a crime under an
E E
abnormal state of mind. He knew that it was wrong to commit the
crime, but he did not appreciate that the commission was as
F F
serious as it was: the degree of culpability was thus lessened.”
G G
24. Chiu Peng, Richard was cited in HKSAR v Chen
H Xuehui11where the court reduced the sentence imposed after trial where the H
I
defendant suffered from Bipolar Affective Disorder and displayed florid I
symptoms at the time of the offence. McMahon DHCJ in Chen Xuehui
J J
said that in determining whether the illness has affected one’s culpability
K
for the offence requires an assessment of the nature and severity of the K
illness and an appreciation of the relevance of its symptoms to the
L L
commission of the offence.
M M
25. You told both the psychiatrist and the clinical psychologist
N that you had consumed ice and hypnotics the night before the offences. N
You told the psychiatrist that you heard a male voice telling you to put
O O
your toy gun in your bag when going to Mongkok to purchase hypnotics.
P Similarly you told the clinical psychologist that you had placed the gun in P
your bag days before on the instructions of a voice telling you to take the
Q Q
gun for repair. You also told the clinical psychologist when you walked
R by a retail shop you heard a hallucinated voice telling you to steal12. R
S S
11
HCCC 19/2012.
T 12
T
See §8 of the psychiatric report and §§ 10 & 11 of the psychological report.
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
26. Although you may have been acting under the influence of
C psychiatric illness at the time of the offences this was self induced by your C
continuous abuse of drugs. Whilst sympathetic to anyone suffering from
D D
mental illness I am satisfied in the circumstances there should be no
E further discount on account of the fact you may have been acting under the E
influence of drug-induced psychosis at the time.
F F
Totality
G G
H 27. Mr Chu asks that a concurrent or largely concurrent sentence H
be imposed. As pointed out earlier unlike the cases cited by Mr Chu
I I
where the imitation firearm was used in the course of the crime and
J therefore taken into account when sentencing for that offence, you did not J
use the air gun in committing the theft.
K K
L
28. The two offences are therefore separate and distinct. I am L
satisfied wholly consecutive sentences are appropriate making a total
M M
sentence of 2 years and 8 months imprisonment, which I am satisfied
N properly reflects your culpability on both charges. N
O Sentence O
P P
29. You are convicted and sentenced as follows
Q Q
Charge 1 – 8 months imprisonment; and
R R
Charge 2 – 2 years imprisonment consecutive to charge 1.
S S
(D. J. DUFTON)
T T
District Judge
U U
V V