A A
B B
DCCC 936/2024 & DCCC 1337/2024
C (Heard Together) C
[2025] HKDC 1530
D D
E IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE E
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
F F
CRIMINAL CASE NOS 936 OF 2024 & 1337 OF 2024
G G
----------------------------
H H
HKSAR
I v I
LAI HOI YAN VIVIAN
J J
----------------------------
K Before: His Honour Judge Tam K
Date: 3 September 2025
L L
Present: Ms Li Karen, Public Prosecutor, for HKSAR
M Ms Liang Sun Yin, Cecilia, Counsel instructed by HK & JY M
Solicitors, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the
N N
defendant
O Offences: DCCC 936/2024 O
[1] & [2] Theft（盜竊罪）
P P
[3] Attempted theft（企圖盜竊罪）
Q Q
[4] Possession of dangerous drugs（管有危險藥物）
R [5] Assaulting a police officer in the execution of her duty（襲 R
擊執行職責的警務人員）
S S
DCCC 1337/2024
T T
Theft（盜竊罪）
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
-----------------------------------------
C REASONS FOR SENTENCE C
-----------------------------------------
D D
E 1. DCCC 936/2024 and DCCC 1337/2024 are heard together E
though they are not consolidated.
F F
G DCCC 936/2024 G
H H
2. In DCCC 936/2024, Ms Lai pleaded guilty before me to 5
I charges on a Charge Sheet as follows. I
J J
3. Charges 1 and 2 are both Theft, contrary to section 9 of the
K Theft Ordinance, Cap 210. K
L L
4. Particulars of Charge 1 are that she, on 5 October 2023,
M outside Shop B, Ground Floor, Shung Tak Building, No 16 Kik Yeung M
Road, Yuen Long, New Territories, in Hong Kong, stole one wallet
N N
containing cash of $300 Hong Kong currency and one ATM card, property
O belonging to Wong Mei Ki. O
P P
Q 5. Particulars of Charge 2 are that she, on 31 October 2023, at Q
Shop D, Ground Floor, No 14 Yuen Long Pau Cheung Square, Yuen Long,
R R
New Territories, in Hong Kong, stole one coin bag containing cash of about
S $1,600 Hong Kong currency and one ATM card, property belonging to Liu S
Wenjin.
T T
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
6. Charge 3 is Attempted theft, contrary to section 9 of the Theft
C Ordinance, Cap 210, and section 159G of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap 200. C
Particulars of Charge 3 are that she, on 31 October 2023, at Shop No 11B,
D D
Ground Floor, Healey Building Shopping Centre, Nos 211-223 Castle Peak
E Road – Yuen Long, Yuen Long, New Territories, in Hong Kong, attempted E
to steal two iPhones, property belonging to another.
F F
G 7. Charge 4 is Possession of dangerous drugs, contrary to section G
8(1)(a) and (2) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134. Particulars
H H
are that she, on 31 October 2023, near Lamppost No FB5837, Hi Lee Path,
I Yuen Long, New Territories, in Hong Kong, had in her possession I
dangerous drugs, namely 4 tablets and two tablets fragment containing 0.05
J J
gramme of midazolam, and 17 tablets containing 0.06 gramme of diazepam.
K K
8. Charge 5 is Assaulting a police officer in the execution of her
L L
duty, contrary to section 63 of the Police Force Ordinance, Cap 232.
M Particulars are that she, on 31 October 2023, at Search Room, Yuen Long M
Police Station, No 246 Castle Peak Road – Yuen Long, Yuen Long, New
N N
Territories, in Hong Kong, assaulted Woman Detective Police Constable
O 26189, a police officer of the Hong Kong Police Force acting in the O
execution of her duty.
P P
Q DCCC 1337/2024 Q
R R
9. In DCCC 1337/2024, Ms Lai pleaded guilty before me to one
S charge of Theft on a Charge Sheet, contrary to section 9 of the Theft S
Ordinance, Cap 210.
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
C 10. Particulars are that she, on 20 August 2024, inside a light rail C
train compartment, Siu Hong Light Rail Station, Tuen Mun, New
D D
Territories, in Hong Kong, stole one backpack, one wallet, two Hong Kong
E Identity Cards, one Birth Certificate, one driving licence, 5 credit cards, E
one ATM card, one Octopus card, one E-payment card of the Hong Kong
F F
Housing Authority and cash of $600 Hong Kong currency, property
G belonging to another. G
H H
Facts admitted by Ms Lai
I I
Charge 1 of DCCC 936/2024
J J
K 11. On 5 October 2023, PW1 Ms Wong Mei Ki brought her 2- K
year-old daughter to a photo shop in Shung Tak Building, Yuen Long, to
L L
take photos. She left her baby trolley on the pedestrian path outside. Her
M wallet containing $300 and an ATM card were placed inside the trolley. M
After 10 minutes, she went outside and found the wallet missing. CCTV
N N
showed Ms Lai took the wallet and fled.
O O
Charge 2 of DCCC 936/2024
P P
Q 12. On 31 October 2023, PW2 Liu Wenjin a waitress working at Q
a restaurant in Yuen Long Pau Cheung Square left her handbag on a table
R R
next to the cashier. There was a coin bag inside the handbag. The coin
S bag (valued at $50) contained cash of about $1,600 and one ATM card. S
T T
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
When she was about to leave work in the afternoon, she found the coin bag
C missing. CCTV showed that Ms Lai took the coin bag at 1328 hours. C
D D
13. PW2’s ATM card was subsequent recovered from Ms Lai’s
E trousers pocket after the latter’s arrest (see below). E
F F
Charge 3 of DCCC 936/2024
G G
14. On 31 October 2023, at 1500 hours, PW3 Ms Wu and a Ms
H H
Yuen were working at a store in Healey Building Shopping Centre, Yuen
I Long. They left two iPhones on a shelf unattended. Ms Lai entered the I
store and picked up one of the two said iPhones (the one belonging to PW3)
J J
from the shelf. PW3 saw what happened and snatched it back. Ms Lai
K then tried to pick up the other of the said iPhones but PW3 prevented her K
from succeeding. Ms Lai fled. CCTV captured the course of the incident.
L L
M 15. Later the same day, police arrested Ms Lai for theft. Under M
caution, Ms Lai denied the offence.
N N
O Charge 4 of DCCC 936/2024 O
P P
16. Police searched Ms Lai’s handbag. As a result, they found
Q inside it one transparent plastic bag containing 1 foilpack containing 3 Q
tablets and 1 tablet fragment containing a total of 0.04 gramme of
R R
midazolam (E1). Police arrested Ms Lai for possession of dangerous drugs.
S S
T T
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
17. From inside the same handbag, police further found another
C transparent plastic bag containing: C
D D
(a) 1 tablet and 1 tablet fragment containing a total of 0.01
E gramme of midazolam (E2); E
F F
(b) 1 foilpack containing 9 tablets containing a total of 0.03
G gramme of diazepam (E3); and G
H H
(c) One plastic bag containing 8 tablets containing a total
I of 0.03 gramme of diazepam (E4). I
J J
Charge 5 of DCCC 936/2024
K K
18. On 31 October 2023, at 2134 hours, when WDPC 26189
L L
(PW6) was interviewing Ms Lai inside the search room of Yuen Long
M Police Station, Ms Lai suddenly turned emotional and grabbed a paper cup M
filled with lukewarm water from a table and threw it at PW6, splashing her
N N
T-shirt with water. PW6 did not suffer any injury.
O O
The sole charge in DCCC 1337/2024
P P
Q 19. On 20 August 2024, Ms Wong Tung Nei was travelling in a Q
light rail train compartment in Tuen Mun with her daughter seated in a
R R
baby stroller. Ms Wong’s backpack was hung on the handle of the baby
S stroller. The backpack contained: S
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
(a) Ms Wong’s wallet;
C C
(b) The HKID cards of hers and her daughter’s;
D D
E (c) Her daughter’s Birth Certificate; E
F F
(d) Ms Wong’s driving licence;
G G
(e) Five credit cards;
H H
I (f) One ATM card; I
J J
(g) One Octopus card;
K K
(h) One E-payment card of Hong Kong Housing Authority;
L L
and
M M
(i) Cash of $600.
N N
O 20. Ms Lai was also inside the compartment. O
P P
21. At Siu Hong Light Rail Station, when Ms Wong was alighting,
Q Ms Lai helped Ms Wong push the baby stroller off the compartment but at Q
the same time Ms Lai took hold of the backpack. After helping Ms Wong,
R R
Ms Lai returned to the compartment with the backpack and continued with
S the journey. CCTV captured what happened. S
T T
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
22. Case was reported after Ms Wong discovered her backpack
C was missing. C
D D
23. On 21 August 2024, Ms Lai was arrested. Under caution, she
E admitted that on the day in question, she stole the backpack out of greed E
while pretending to assist Ms Wong with the baby stroller.
F F
G 24. Ms Lai admitted that she committed the offence under DCCC G
1337/2024 whilst on court bail for the case of DCCC 936/2024.
H H
I Criminal record I
J J
25. Ms Lai has 60 previous convictions of which 38 were for theft
K or attempted theft, 5 were for possession of dangerous drug, and one was K
for assaulting a police officer.
L L
M Antecedents M
N N
26. Ms Lai is aged 48 (46-47 at the time of the offences), educated
O to F2 level at school but later completed F5 level in Training Centre. She O
has previous worked in various capacities but she was unemployed at the
P P
time of arrest. Ms Lai’s father passed away when she was about 11 years
Q old. Ms Lai’s mother (66) lives in Tuen Mun. Ms Lai has a younger Q
brother (44) in full employment. Ms Lai’s husband (58) is unemployed
R R
and her daughter (15) is a student.
S S
T T
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
Mitigation
C C
27. Ms Cecilia Liang of counsel assigned by the Director of Legal
D D
Aid mitigated on behalf of Ms Lai. The following is a summary of the
E mitigation submissions. E
F F
28. Ms Lai aged 48 is single, living on public assistance and
G unemployed. Ms Liang submitted a medical report dated 19 December G
2024 regarding Ms Lai’s psychological (sic) medical history. The theft
H H
offences were basically caused by her drug induced psychiatric medical
I condition. The root to her criminal path was the drug problem. After a I
long custody since arrest, Ms Lai said she is now clear from her drug
J J
problem and therefore would not engage in these thieving behavior
K anymore. K
L L
DCCC 936/2024
M M
29. The facts of Charge 1 involve the taking of a wallet from a
N N
baby trolley. Charge 2 involved the taking of a coin bag from a handbag
O left on a table. Charge 3 involved the attempt to take two mobile phones O
put on a shelf unattended.
P P
Q 30. Strictly speaking, they are not pickpocket cases as the stolen Q
properties were not taken from the victim’s person; but in the case of
R R
HKSAR v Wu Chung Keung [2020] HKDC 1176, it was observed there
S shouldn't be any distinction between taking unattended property and S
pickpocket.
T T
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B B
C 31. Therefore, the guidelines for sentencing in HKSAR v Ngo Van C
Huy [2005] 2 HKLRD 1 (CACC 107/2004) would be applicable. A term
D D
of 12-15 months’ of imprisonment would therefore be adopted as a starting
E point. E
F F
32. In line with the guidelines in Ngo Van Huy, there should be
G consideration for aggravating factors. In the instant case, there was no G
weapon, and the facts of the case did not indicate it was part of “an
H H
organized or professional ring of thieves.” All three charges happened in
I a shop, so it shouldn't be considered as a crowded public place. I
J J
33. The stolen properties in these three charges are personal
K properties, two mobile phones containing personal particulars and two K
ATM cards. The total amount of value of cash stolen is $1,900.
L L
M 34. Indeed, Ms Lai had 37 similar dishonesty criminal record. M
However, she shouldn't be considered as a professional pickpocket as she
N N
didn't steal from the victims’ person unnoticed. She only stole because she
O was suffering from psychological illness and was driven by her drug O
addiction at a time to repeatedly commit similar offences. She didn't
P P
manifest any special skill in stealing the items and, at best, should be
Q considered as opportunistic. She only preyed on unattended items. Of Q
course, that shouldn't be a mitigating reason, but she was not a trained or
R R
skilled pickpocket taking items from victims’ person unnoticed.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
B B
35. In a case of HKSAR v Wong Kang Sun [2014] 1 HKLRD 622
C (CACC 265/2013), 12 months’ imprisonment starting point was adopted, C
but the defendant in that case had an appalling record of 58 previous (9
D D
months added). The theft occurred in a crowded market (3 months added).
E It was submitted that neither aggravating factors would apply in the instant E
case.
F F
G 36. In the case of HKSAR v Chiu Suet Yee, Angel CACC 105/2010, G
for the 5 charges of theft the defendant there was sentenced to 14 and 12
H H
months’ imprisonment for each charge. However, a further 3 months’
I imprisonment was added for the aggravating factor of happening in a I
crowded market, 6 months added for poor criminal record and 3 months
J J
for jointly acting with another.
K K
37. It was submitted that in consideration of the facts of these 3
L L
charges of theft (sic), a starting point of 13-14 months of imprisonment
M would be appropriate. There shouldn't be any aggravating factor to warrant M
an additional imprisonment sentence. The location of the offences was not
N N
a public crowded place, and the defendant’s previous convictions were not
O due to her professionalism but due to her drug addiction. O
P P
38. The dangerous drug in Charge 4 was found on defendant upon
Q search after arrest. For the charge for possession of Midazolum, Ms Lai Q
should be sentenced to a short imprisonment term, especially now that she
R R
had been in custody for over a year, and her addiction had been cured.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 12 -
A A
B B
39. The assault in Charge 5 involved the throwing of a paper cup
C of water at a police officer. No injuries were caused. That was just an C
emotional outburst due to her emotional problem at that time. Her
D D
psychological problem is now under control due to her staying away from
E drug. It was submitted that the Ms Lai should be sentenced to a short E
imprisonment term.
F F
G 40. Two cases of theft (sic) occurred on 31 October 2023, while G
one case of theft occurred earlier on 5 October 2023, discovered upon the
H H
arrest of Ms Lai on 31 October 2023. Charges 4 and 5 happened also upon
I the arrest of Ms Lai. It was submitted that Charges 2 to 5 should be I
sentenced concurrently. Charge 1 should also be served concurrently in
J J
view of the reason behind the offences was her drug addiction and
K emotional illness. And there should be the consideration of totality even if K
imprisonment sentence of Charge 1 should be partly served consecutive.
L L
M DCCC 1337/2024 M
N N
41. Ms Lai was charged for theft of a backpack left on a baby
O stroller inside light rail train. Inside the backpack were personal identity O
items, ATM card and credit cards.
P P
Q 42. The guidelines for theft in Ngo Van Huy should likewise apply. Q
Although it is not strictly speaking a pickpocket case as the backpack was
R R
taken from a baby stroller.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 13 -
A A
B B
43. It was submitted that in consideration of the offence
C happening in a public transport, a three months’ addition of imprisonment C
would be added to the basic starting point of 12 to 15 months of
D D
imprisonment. There shouldn't be any aggravating factor to warrant an
E additional imprisonment sentence in view of her criminal record for the E
reasons stated earlier.
F F
G 44. It was submitted that the imprisonment sentence imposed G
under this case should also be partly served concurrently to that of the other
H H
case in consideration of totality.
I I
45. Ms Liang acknowledged that the fact that Ms Lai committed
J J
the offence under DCCC 1137/2024 whilst on court bail for DCCC
K 936/2024 is an aggravating factor. K
L L
46. Ms Liang submitted on behalf of Ms Lai two mitigation letters
M written in Chinese by respectively Ms Lai’s mother and a pastor. The letter M
writers urged the court to give another chance to Ms Lai and to sentence
N N
her leniently.
O O
47. Ms Liang also submitted two letters from Castle Peak
P P
Hospital dated 2 January 2024 and 25 June 2024 respectively. They
Q certified that Ms Lai has been suffering from Stimulant induced psychosis Q
and Emotional unstable personality disorder, borderline type; that she has
R R
been receiving treatment from Tuen Mun Mental Health Centre; that she
S was admitted to Castle Peak Hospital between 31 May and 26 June 2024. S
T T
U U
V V
- 14 -
A A
B B
48. At the sentencing hearing, Ms Liang submitted another
C mitigation letter written in Chinese by Ms Lai. The contents generally are C
that Ms Lai committed similar theft offences since her youthful days
D D
because of her impoverished background and weak social consciousness
E and low moral values; that she decided to change her ways in 2023; E
however, in October of the same year, she separated with her girlfriend and
F F
this caused her to engage in substance abuse as a relief; she found herself
G bent on stealing things; so she asked to see the resident social worker in G
Castle Peak Hospital; however, this did not stop her from commiting
H H
another offence in August 2024 whilst on bail. Ms Lai in her letter finally
I asked for another chance and asked the court not to impose a heavy I
sentence.
J J
K 49. Ms Liang also referred to parts of the psychological report K
lately obtained in her further mitigation. Ms Liang submitted that Ms Lai
L L
has promised to keep all medical appointments after release from prison.
M M
Reports
N N
O 50. A psychiatric report and a psychological report were obtained O
as a result of Ms Liang’s mitigation submissions.
P P
Q 51. The psychiatric report has the following significant narratives: Q
R R
“2. Lai says of the theft charges that at the times she was
unhappy because of her boyfriend of many years leaving her,
S S
and she was in the habit of using hypnotics every day.
T 3 she had limited herself to only hypnotics lately, some 10 T
tablets a day for “relaxation”.
U U
V V
- 15 -
A A
B B
…
C C
5. Over the years she had been sent to hospital many times,
the last admission was to the Castle Peak Hospital 31 May to 26
D June 2024 for “stimulant intoxication”. D
E
6. Lai has been in remand for many months, and E
examination now finds her settled, coherent, of neutral mood
and not showing signs of mental disturbance.
F F
7. Opinion: Lai has long had a problem with drug abuse and
a history of repeated psychiatric complications arising therefrom.
G G
In abstinence her mental condition is stable. She should
continue to visit the psychiatric outpatient clinic for prescription
H and advice.” H
I 52. The psychological report has the following narratives: I
J J
“11. She was impressed to have maladaptively relied on
drugs and offending for distress coping over the years, and the
K index offences were seemingly examples demonstrating such K
characteristic. It was inconclusive whether Ms Lai was suffering
L from pathological stealing as the influence from drugs could not L
be ruled out at this juncture. She also had history of committing
stealing for secondary gain, ie to relieve financial stress, to put
M herself into prison to meet with partner. With reference to M
results of The Level of Service Inventory – Revised, a common
N
appraisal tool for general offending, the prognosis of her stealing N
behaviours was suggested to be poor with high risk of re-
offending.
O O
Conclusion and Recommendation
P P
12. Ms Lai is a re-offender with chronic history of thievish
acts. She was also known for polysubstance misuse and unstable
Q mental state, and had psychiatric follow-up for over 20 years. Q
Information collected in the present assessment suggested that
she had strong tendency of maladaptive stress coping, and she
R seemed to commit the current offences out of the frustration she R
experienced after breakup. It was inconclusive whether Ms Lai
S was suffering from pathological stealing at present, but given S
her limited insights and low motivation to change, her prognosis
was suggested to be poor with high re-offending risk…”
T T
U U
V V
- 16 -
A A
B B
Sentence
C C
53. Prosecution told the court that the victim in DCCC 1337/2024
D D
has actually recovered all her lost property. So as far as that case is
E concerned, there was no loss. E
F F
54. Also, in relation to the two respective victims under Charge 1
G and Charge 2 of DCCC 936/2024, Ms Lai agreed to take out from money G
seized from her the sums of $300 and $1,600 respectively to be returned to
H H
the two victims for their monetary losses.
I I
55. I accede to the submission of Ms Liang that the sentencing
J J
guidelines in Ngo Van Huy be adopted for the theft and attempted theft
K offences. However, I reject the submission that allowance can be given to K
Ms Lai because of her psychological issue which might be said to have
L L
contributed to why she committed the offences.
M M
56. Under DCCC 936/2024, for Charge 1, I will adopt an initial
N N
starting point of 15 months’ imprisonment (HKSAR v Suen Ping [2024]
O HKCA 701, para 11 considered). Because of the aggravating factor of Ms O
Lai being a persistent offender, I increase that starting point by 6 months
P P
to become 21 months’ imprisonment.
Q Q
57. For Charge 2 under DCCC 936/2024, again I will adopt an
R R
initial starting point of 15 months’ imprisonment. The theft took place at
S about 1:30PM in a restaurant on a weekday. It can be inferred that the S
restaurant was reasonably crowded at that time. For the dual aggravating
T T
U U
V V
- 17 -
A A
B B
factors of Ms Lai being a persistent offender and the crime scene being a
C crowded public place, I increase the starting point by 7½ months to become C
22 ½ months’ imprisonment.
D D
E 58. For Charge 3 under DCCC 936/2024, again I will adopt 15 E
months’ imprisonment as the starting point. There is no evidence of how
F F
busy the store was at the relevant time. Although the subject of theft being
G a mobile phone will usually aggravate the offence because of its immense G
value in the present age, I will not enhance the starting point on this score
H H
because the attempt was unsuccessful. I will simply increase the starting
I point by 6 months to become 21 months’ imprisonment to reflect the I
aggravating factor of Ms Lai being a persistent offender.
J J
K 59. For Charge 4 under DCCC 936/2024, because of the small K
amount of drugs involved, I will adopt an initial starting point of one
L L
month’s imprisonment. Because of her status as a repeat offender, I add ½
M month to it to become 1½ months’ imprisonment. Enhancement for latent M
risk is unnecessary.
N N
O 60. For Charge 5 under DCCC 936/2024, the maximum O
imprisonment sentence for the offence is 6 months’ imprisonment. For the
P P
reasons that it did not take place in public and there was no injury caused
Q to the constable, I adopt a lower starting point of 1½ months’ imprisonment. Q
R R
61. Under DCCC 1337/2024, again I adopt the initial starting
S point of 15 months’ imprisonment. For the dual aggravating factors of Ms S
Lai being a persistent offender and the offence taking place in a public
T T
U U
V V
- 18 -
A A
B B
transport, I increase the starting point by 7½ months. For the aggravating
C factor that the offence was committed whilst on court bail, I increase the C
starting point further by 1½ month to become 24 months’ imprisonment.
D D
E 62. Ms Lai pleaded guilty in good time earning for herself the E
customary 1/3 sentencing discount. For Charge 1 and Charge 2 under
F F
DCCC 936/2024, and for the sole charge under DCCC 1337/2024, because
G of the fact that monetary losses have been recouped or all lost property has G
been recovered, I reduce one more month after the 1/3 reduction. I can
H H
find no other mitigating factors of weight to reduce the sentences further.
I I
63. Although some of the offences were committed on the same
J J
day, all offences were separate and distinct, and none of them was
K concomitant to the others. In principle, their sentences ought to run K
consecutively to one another. However, I will bear in mind the principle
L L
of totality when determining the aggregate sentence under DCCC
M 936/2024 and the final sentence that Ms Lai is to serve under both DCCC M
936/2024 and DCCC 1337/2024. I will also alert myself to the possibility
N N
of an excessive final sentence in light of the fact that the aggravating factor
O of Ms Lai being a persistent offender of theft has been factored into all the O
theft and attempted theft offences herein.
P P
Q (Ms Lai, please stand) Q
R R
64. In the case DCCC 936/2024, the sentences are as follows:
S S
(a) The sentence for Charge 1 is 13 months’ imprisonment.
T T
U U
V V
- 19 -
A A
B B
C (b) The sentence for Charge 2 is 14 months’ imprisonment. C
D D
(c) The sentence for Charge 3 is 14 months’ imprisonment.
E E
(d) The sentence for Charge 4 is one month’s
F F
imprisonment.
G G
(e) The sentence for Charge 5 is one month’s
H H
imprisonment.
I I
65. In DCCC 936/2024, I order that 7 months of the sentence on
J J
Charge 2 and 7 months of the sentence on Charge 3 are each to run
K consecutively to the consecutive sentences of Charges 1, 4 and 5. The K
aggregate sentence under DCCC 936/2024 is therefore 29 months’
L L
imprisonment.
M M
66. In the case DCCC 1337/2024, the sentence for the sole charge
N N
is 15 months’ imprisonment.
O O
67. Finally, I order that 4 months of the sentence under DCCC
P P
1337/2024 is to run consecutively to the aggregate sentence under DCCC
Q 936/2024 of 29 months’ imprisonment. Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 20 -
A A
B B
68. In other words, the final sentence under both DCCC 936/2024
C and DCCC 1337/2024 is 33 months’ imprisonment. C
D D
E E
F F
( Isaac Tam )
G G
District Judge
H H
I I
J J
K K
L L
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
A A
B B
DCCC 936/2024 & DCCC 1337/2024
C (Heard Together) C
[2025] HKDC 1530
D D
E IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE E
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
F F
CRIMINAL CASE NOS 936 OF 2024 & 1337 OF 2024
G G
----------------------------
H H
HKSAR
I v I
LAI HOI YAN VIVIAN
J J
----------------------------
K Before: His Honour Judge Tam K
Date: 3 September 2025
L L
Present: Ms Li Karen, Public Prosecutor, for HKSAR
M Ms Liang Sun Yin, Cecilia, Counsel instructed by HK & JY M
Solicitors, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the
N N
defendant
O Offences: DCCC 936/2024 O
[1] & [2] Theft（盜竊罪）
P P
[3] Attempted theft（企圖盜竊罪）
Q Q
[4] Possession of dangerous drugs（管有危險藥物）
R [5] Assaulting a police officer in the execution of her duty（襲 R
擊執行職責的警務人員）
S S
DCCC 1337/2024
T T
Theft（盜竊罪）
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
-----------------------------------------
C REASONS FOR SENTENCE C
-----------------------------------------
D D
E 1. DCCC 936/2024 and DCCC 1337/2024 are heard together E
though they are not consolidated.
F F
G DCCC 936/2024 G
H H
2. In DCCC 936/2024, Ms Lai pleaded guilty before me to 5
I charges on a Charge Sheet as follows. I
J J
3. Charges 1 and 2 are both Theft, contrary to section 9 of the
K Theft Ordinance, Cap 210. K
L L
4. Particulars of Charge 1 are that she, on 5 October 2023,
M outside Shop B, Ground Floor, Shung Tak Building, No 16 Kik Yeung M
Road, Yuen Long, New Territories, in Hong Kong, stole one wallet
N N
containing cash of $300 Hong Kong currency and one ATM card, property
O belonging to Wong Mei Ki. O
P P
Q 5. Particulars of Charge 2 are that she, on 31 October 2023, at Q
Shop D, Ground Floor, No 14 Yuen Long Pau Cheung Square, Yuen Long,
R R
New Territories, in Hong Kong, stole one coin bag containing cash of about
S $1,600 Hong Kong currency and one ATM card, property belonging to Liu S
Wenjin.
T T
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
6. Charge 3 is Attempted theft, contrary to section 9 of the Theft
C Ordinance, Cap 210, and section 159G of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap 200. C
Particulars of Charge 3 are that she, on 31 October 2023, at Shop No 11B,
D D
Ground Floor, Healey Building Shopping Centre, Nos 211-223 Castle Peak
E Road – Yuen Long, Yuen Long, New Territories, in Hong Kong, attempted E
to steal two iPhones, property belonging to another.
F F
G 7. Charge 4 is Possession of dangerous drugs, contrary to section G
8(1)(a) and (2) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap 134. Particulars
H H
are that she, on 31 October 2023, near Lamppost No FB5837, Hi Lee Path,
I Yuen Long, New Territories, in Hong Kong, had in her possession I
dangerous drugs, namely 4 tablets and two tablets fragment containing 0.05
J J
gramme of midazolam, and 17 tablets containing 0.06 gramme of diazepam.
K K
8. Charge 5 is Assaulting a police officer in the execution of her
L L
duty, contrary to section 63 of the Police Force Ordinance, Cap 232.
M Particulars are that she, on 31 October 2023, at Search Room, Yuen Long M
Police Station, No 246 Castle Peak Road – Yuen Long, Yuen Long, New
N N
Territories, in Hong Kong, assaulted Woman Detective Police Constable
O 26189, a police officer of the Hong Kong Police Force acting in the O
execution of her duty.
P P
Q DCCC 1337/2024 Q
R R
9. In DCCC 1337/2024, Ms Lai pleaded guilty before me to one
S charge of Theft on a Charge Sheet, contrary to section 9 of the Theft S
Ordinance, Cap 210.
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
C 10. Particulars are that she, on 20 August 2024, inside a light rail C
train compartment, Siu Hong Light Rail Station, Tuen Mun, New
D D
Territories, in Hong Kong, stole one backpack, one wallet, two Hong Kong
E Identity Cards, one Birth Certificate, one driving licence, 5 credit cards, E
one ATM card, one Octopus card, one E-payment card of the Hong Kong
F F
Housing Authority and cash of $600 Hong Kong currency, property
G belonging to another. G
H H
Facts admitted by Ms Lai
I I
Charge 1 of DCCC 936/2024
J J
K 11. On 5 October 2023, PW1 Ms Wong Mei Ki brought her 2- K
year-old daughter to a photo shop in Shung Tak Building, Yuen Long, to
L L
take photos. She left her baby trolley on the pedestrian path outside. Her
M wallet containing $300 and an ATM card were placed inside the trolley. M
After 10 minutes, she went outside and found the wallet missing. CCTV
N N
showed Ms Lai took the wallet and fled.
O O
Charge 2 of DCCC 936/2024
P P
Q 12. On 31 October 2023, PW2 Liu Wenjin a waitress working at Q
a restaurant in Yuen Long Pau Cheung Square left her handbag on a table
R R
next to the cashier. There was a coin bag inside the handbag. The coin
S bag (valued at $50) contained cash of about $1,600 and one ATM card. S
T T
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
When she was about to leave work in the afternoon, she found the coin bag
C missing. CCTV showed that Ms Lai took the coin bag at 1328 hours. C
D D
13. PW2’s ATM card was subsequent recovered from Ms Lai’s
E trousers pocket after the latter’s arrest (see below). E
F F
Charge 3 of DCCC 936/2024
G G
14. On 31 October 2023, at 1500 hours, PW3 Ms Wu and a Ms
H H
Yuen were working at a store in Healey Building Shopping Centre, Yuen
I Long. They left two iPhones on a shelf unattended. Ms Lai entered the I
store and picked up one of the two said iPhones (the one belonging to PW3)
J J
from the shelf. PW3 saw what happened and snatched it back. Ms Lai
K then tried to pick up the other of the said iPhones but PW3 prevented her K
from succeeding. Ms Lai fled. CCTV captured the course of the incident.
L L
M 15. Later the same day, police arrested Ms Lai for theft. Under M
caution, Ms Lai denied the offence.
N N
O Charge 4 of DCCC 936/2024 O
P P
16. Police searched Ms Lai’s handbag. As a result, they found
Q inside it one transparent plastic bag containing 1 foilpack containing 3 Q
tablets and 1 tablet fragment containing a total of 0.04 gramme of
R R
midazolam (E1). Police arrested Ms Lai for possession of dangerous drugs.
S S
T T
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
17. From inside the same handbag, police further found another
C transparent plastic bag containing: C
D D
(a) 1 tablet and 1 tablet fragment containing a total of 0.01
E gramme of midazolam (E2); E
F F
(b) 1 foilpack containing 9 tablets containing a total of 0.03
G gramme of diazepam (E3); and G
H H
(c) One plastic bag containing 8 tablets containing a total
I of 0.03 gramme of diazepam (E4). I
J J
Charge 5 of DCCC 936/2024
K K
18. On 31 October 2023, at 2134 hours, when WDPC 26189
L L
(PW6) was interviewing Ms Lai inside the search room of Yuen Long
M Police Station, Ms Lai suddenly turned emotional and grabbed a paper cup M
filled with lukewarm water from a table and threw it at PW6, splashing her
N N
T-shirt with water. PW6 did not suffer any injury.
O O
The sole charge in DCCC 1337/2024
P P
Q 19. On 20 August 2024, Ms Wong Tung Nei was travelling in a Q
light rail train compartment in Tuen Mun with her daughter seated in a
R R
baby stroller. Ms Wong’s backpack was hung on the handle of the baby
S stroller. The backpack contained: S
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
(a) Ms Wong’s wallet;
C C
(b) The HKID cards of hers and her daughter’s;
D D
E (c) Her daughter’s Birth Certificate; E
F F
(d) Ms Wong’s driving licence;
G G
(e) Five credit cards;
H H
I (f) One ATM card; I
J J
(g) One Octopus card;
K K
(h) One E-payment card of Hong Kong Housing Authority;
L L
and
M M
(i) Cash of $600.
N N
O 20. Ms Lai was also inside the compartment. O
P P
21. At Siu Hong Light Rail Station, when Ms Wong was alighting,
Q Ms Lai helped Ms Wong push the baby stroller off the compartment but at Q
the same time Ms Lai took hold of the backpack. After helping Ms Wong,
R R
Ms Lai returned to the compartment with the backpack and continued with
S the journey. CCTV captured what happened. S
T T
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
22. Case was reported after Ms Wong discovered her backpack
C was missing. C
D D
23. On 21 August 2024, Ms Lai was arrested. Under caution, she
E admitted that on the day in question, she stole the backpack out of greed E
while pretending to assist Ms Wong with the baby stroller.
F F
G 24. Ms Lai admitted that she committed the offence under DCCC G
1337/2024 whilst on court bail for the case of DCCC 936/2024.
H H
I Criminal record I
J J
25. Ms Lai has 60 previous convictions of which 38 were for theft
K or attempted theft, 5 were for possession of dangerous drug, and one was K
for assaulting a police officer.
L L
M Antecedents M
N N
26. Ms Lai is aged 48 (46-47 at the time of the offences), educated
O to F2 level at school but later completed F5 level in Training Centre. She O
has previous worked in various capacities but she was unemployed at the
P P
time of arrest. Ms Lai’s father passed away when she was about 11 years
Q old. Ms Lai’s mother (66) lives in Tuen Mun. Ms Lai has a younger Q
brother (44) in full employment. Ms Lai’s husband (58) is unemployed
R R
and her daughter (15) is a student.
S S
T T
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
Mitigation
C C
27. Ms Cecilia Liang of counsel assigned by the Director of Legal
D D
Aid mitigated on behalf of Ms Lai. The following is a summary of the
E mitigation submissions. E
F F
28. Ms Lai aged 48 is single, living on public assistance and
G unemployed. Ms Liang submitted a medical report dated 19 December G
2024 regarding Ms Lai’s psychological (sic) medical history. The theft
H H
offences were basically caused by her drug induced psychiatric medical
I condition. The root to her criminal path was the drug problem. After a I
long custody since arrest, Ms Lai said she is now clear from her drug
J J
problem and therefore would not engage in these thieving behavior
K anymore. K
L L
DCCC 936/2024
M M
29. The facts of Charge 1 involve the taking of a wallet from a
N N
baby trolley. Charge 2 involved the taking of a coin bag from a handbag
O left on a table. Charge 3 involved the attempt to take two mobile phones O
put on a shelf unattended.
P P
Q 30. Strictly speaking, they are not pickpocket cases as the stolen Q
properties were not taken from the victim’s person; but in the case of
R R
HKSAR v Wu Chung Keung [2020] HKDC 1176, it was observed there
S shouldn't be any distinction between taking unattended property and S
pickpocket.
T T
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B B
C 31. Therefore, the guidelines for sentencing in HKSAR v Ngo Van C
Huy [2005] 2 HKLRD 1 (CACC 107/2004) would be applicable. A term
D D
of 12-15 months’ of imprisonment would therefore be adopted as a starting
E point. E
F F
32. In line with the guidelines in Ngo Van Huy, there should be
G consideration for aggravating factors. In the instant case, there was no G
weapon, and the facts of the case did not indicate it was part of “an
H H
organized or professional ring of thieves.” All three charges happened in
I a shop, so it shouldn't be considered as a crowded public place. I
J J
33. The stolen properties in these three charges are personal
K properties, two mobile phones containing personal particulars and two K
ATM cards. The total amount of value of cash stolen is $1,900.
L L
M 34. Indeed, Ms Lai had 37 similar dishonesty criminal record. M
However, she shouldn't be considered as a professional pickpocket as she
N N
didn't steal from the victims’ person unnoticed. She only stole because she
O was suffering from psychological illness and was driven by her drug O
addiction at a time to repeatedly commit similar offences. She didn't
P P
manifest any special skill in stealing the items and, at best, should be
Q considered as opportunistic. She only preyed on unattended items. Of Q
course, that shouldn't be a mitigating reason, but she was not a trained or
R R
skilled pickpocket taking items from victims’ person unnoticed.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
B B
35. In a case of HKSAR v Wong Kang Sun [2014] 1 HKLRD 622
C (CACC 265/2013), 12 months’ imprisonment starting point was adopted, C
but the defendant in that case had an appalling record of 58 previous (9
D D
months added). The theft occurred in a crowded market (3 months added).
E It was submitted that neither aggravating factors would apply in the instant E
case.
F F
G 36. In the case of HKSAR v Chiu Suet Yee, Angel CACC 105/2010, G
for the 5 charges of theft the defendant there was sentenced to 14 and 12
H H
months’ imprisonment for each charge. However, a further 3 months’
I imprisonment was added for the aggravating factor of happening in a I
crowded market, 6 months added for poor criminal record and 3 months
J J
for jointly acting with another.
K K
37. It was submitted that in consideration of the facts of these 3
L L
charges of theft (sic), a starting point of 13-14 months of imprisonment
M would be appropriate. There shouldn't be any aggravating factor to warrant M
an additional imprisonment sentence. The location of the offences was not
N N
a public crowded place, and the defendant’s previous convictions were not
O due to her professionalism but due to her drug addiction. O
P P
38. The dangerous drug in Charge 4 was found on defendant upon
Q search after arrest. For the charge for possession of Midazolum, Ms Lai Q
should be sentenced to a short imprisonment term, especially now that she
R R
had been in custody for over a year, and her addiction had been cured.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 12 -
A A
B B
39. The assault in Charge 5 involved the throwing of a paper cup
C of water at a police officer. No injuries were caused. That was just an C
emotional outburst due to her emotional problem at that time. Her
D D
psychological problem is now under control due to her staying away from
E drug. It was submitted that the Ms Lai should be sentenced to a short E
imprisonment term.
F F
G 40. Two cases of theft (sic) occurred on 31 October 2023, while G
one case of theft occurred earlier on 5 October 2023, discovered upon the
H H
arrest of Ms Lai on 31 October 2023. Charges 4 and 5 happened also upon
I the arrest of Ms Lai. It was submitted that Charges 2 to 5 should be I
sentenced concurrently. Charge 1 should also be served concurrently in
J J
view of the reason behind the offences was her drug addiction and
K emotional illness. And there should be the consideration of totality even if K
imprisonment sentence of Charge 1 should be partly served consecutive.
L L
M DCCC 1337/2024 M
N N
41. Ms Lai was charged for theft of a backpack left on a baby
O stroller inside light rail train. Inside the backpack were personal identity O
items, ATM card and credit cards.
P P
Q 42. The guidelines for theft in Ngo Van Huy should likewise apply. Q
Although it is not strictly speaking a pickpocket case as the backpack was
R R
taken from a baby stroller.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 13 -
A A
B B
43. It was submitted that in consideration of the offence
C happening in a public transport, a three months’ addition of imprisonment C
would be added to the basic starting point of 12 to 15 months of
D D
imprisonment. There shouldn't be any aggravating factor to warrant an
E additional imprisonment sentence in view of her criminal record for the E
reasons stated earlier.
F F
G 44. It was submitted that the imprisonment sentence imposed G
under this case should also be partly served concurrently to that of the other
H H
case in consideration of totality.
I I
45. Ms Liang acknowledged that the fact that Ms Lai committed
J J
the offence under DCCC 1137/2024 whilst on court bail for DCCC
K 936/2024 is an aggravating factor. K
L L
46. Ms Liang submitted on behalf of Ms Lai two mitigation letters
M written in Chinese by respectively Ms Lai’s mother and a pastor. The letter M
writers urged the court to give another chance to Ms Lai and to sentence
N N
her leniently.
O O
47. Ms Liang also submitted two letters from Castle Peak
P P
Hospital dated 2 January 2024 and 25 June 2024 respectively. They
Q certified that Ms Lai has been suffering from Stimulant induced psychosis Q
and Emotional unstable personality disorder, borderline type; that she has
R R
been receiving treatment from Tuen Mun Mental Health Centre; that she
S was admitted to Castle Peak Hospital between 31 May and 26 June 2024. S
T T
U U
V V
- 14 -
A A
B B
48. At the sentencing hearing, Ms Liang submitted another
C mitigation letter written in Chinese by Ms Lai. The contents generally are C
that Ms Lai committed similar theft offences since her youthful days
D D
because of her impoverished background and weak social consciousness
E and low moral values; that she decided to change her ways in 2023; E
however, in October of the same year, she separated with her girlfriend and
F F
this caused her to engage in substance abuse as a relief; she found herself
G bent on stealing things; so she asked to see the resident social worker in G
Castle Peak Hospital; however, this did not stop her from commiting
H H
another offence in August 2024 whilst on bail. Ms Lai in her letter finally
I asked for another chance and asked the court not to impose a heavy I
sentence.
J J
K 49. Ms Liang also referred to parts of the psychological report K
lately obtained in her further mitigation. Ms Liang submitted that Ms Lai
L L
has promised to keep all medical appointments after release from prison.
M M
Reports
N N
O 50. A psychiatric report and a psychological report were obtained O
as a result of Ms Liang’s mitigation submissions.
P P
Q 51. The psychiatric report has the following significant narratives: Q
R R
“2. Lai says of the theft charges that at the times she was
unhappy because of her boyfriend of many years leaving her,
S S
and she was in the habit of using hypnotics every day.
T 3 she had limited herself to only hypnotics lately, some 10 T
tablets a day for “relaxation”.
U U
V V
- 15 -
A A
B B
…
C C
5. Over the years she had been sent to hospital many times,
the last admission was to the Castle Peak Hospital 31 May to 26
D June 2024 for “stimulant intoxication”. D
E
6. Lai has been in remand for many months, and E
examination now finds her settled, coherent, of neutral mood
and not showing signs of mental disturbance.
F F
7. Opinion: Lai has long had a problem with drug abuse and
a history of repeated psychiatric complications arising therefrom.
G G
In abstinence her mental condition is stable. She should
continue to visit the psychiatric outpatient clinic for prescription
H and advice.” H
I 52. The psychological report has the following narratives: I
J J
“11. She was impressed to have maladaptively relied on
drugs and offending for distress coping over the years, and the
K index offences were seemingly examples demonstrating such K
characteristic. It was inconclusive whether Ms Lai was suffering
L from pathological stealing as the influence from drugs could not L
be ruled out at this juncture. She also had history of committing
stealing for secondary gain, ie to relieve financial stress, to put
M herself into prison to meet with partner. With reference to M
results of The Level of Service Inventory – Revised, a common
N
appraisal tool for general offending, the prognosis of her stealing N
behaviours was suggested to be poor with high risk of re-
offending.
O O
Conclusion and Recommendation
P P
12. Ms Lai is a re-offender with chronic history of thievish
acts. She was also known for polysubstance misuse and unstable
Q mental state, and had psychiatric follow-up for over 20 years. Q
Information collected in the present assessment suggested that
she had strong tendency of maladaptive stress coping, and she
R seemed to commit the current offences out of the frustration she R
experienced after breakup. It was inconclusive whether Ms Lai
S was suffering from pathological stealing at present, but given S
her limited insights and low motivation to change, her prognosis
was suggested to be poor with high re-offending risk…”
T T
U U
V V
- 16 -
A A
B B
Sentence
C C
53. Prosecution told the court that the victim in DCCC 1337/2024
D D
has actually recovered all her lost property. So as far as that case is
E concerned, there was no loss. E
F F
54. Also, in relation to the two respective victims under Charge 1
G and Charge 2 of DCCC 936/2024, Ms Lai agreed to take out from money G
seized from her the sums of $300 and $1,600 respectively to be returned to
H H
the two victims for their monetary losses.
I I
55. I accede to the submission of Ms Liang that the sentencing
J J
guidelines in Ngo Van Huy be adopted for the theft and attempted theft
K offences. However, I reject the submission that allowance can be given to K
Ms Lai because of her psychological issue which might be said to have
L L
contributed to why she committed the offences.
M M
56. Under DCCC 936/2024, for Charge 1, I will adopt an initial
N N
starting point of 15 months’ imprisonment (HKSAR v Suen Ping [2024]
O HKCA 701, para 11 considered). Because of the aggravating factor of Ms O
Lai being a persistent offender, I increase that starting point by 6 months
P P
to become 21 months’ imprisonment.
Q Q
57. For Charge 2 under DCCC 936/2024, again I will adopt an
R R
initial starting point of 15 months’ imprisonment. The theft took place at
S about 1:30PM in a restaurant on a weekday. It can be inferred that the S
restaurant was reasonably crowded at that time. For the dual aggravating
T T
U U
V V
- 17 -
A A
B B
factors of Ms Lai being a persistent offender and the crime scene being a
C crowded public place, I increase the starting point by 7½ months to become C
22 ½ months’ imprisonment.
D D
E 58. For Charge 3 under DCCC 936/2024, again I will adopt 15 E
months’ imprisonment as the starting point. There is no evidence of how
F F
busy the store was at the relevant time. Although the subject of theft being
G a mobile phone will usually aggravate the offence because of its immense G
value in the present age, I will not enhance the starting point on this score
H H
because the attempt was unsuccessful. I will simply increase the starting
I point by 6 months to become 21 months’ imprisonment to reflect the I
aggravating factor of Ms Lai being a persistent offender.
J J
K 59. For Charge 4 under DCCC 936/2024, because of the small K
amount of drugs involved, I will adopt an initial starting point of one
L L
month’s imprisonment. Because of her status as a repeat offender, I add ½
M month to it to become 1½ months’ imprisonment. Enhancement for latent M
risk is unnecessary.
N N
O 60. For Charge 5 under DCCC 936/2024, the maximum O
imprisonment sentence for the offence is 6 months’ imprisonment. For the
P P
reasons that it did not take place in public and there was no injury caused
Q to the constable, I adopt a lower starting point of 1½ months’ imprisonment. Q
R R
61. Under DCCC 1337/2024, again I adopt the initial starting
S point of 15 months’ imprisonment. For the dual aggravating factors of Ms S
Lai being a persistent offender and the offence taking place in a public
T T
U U
V V
- 18 -
A A
B B
transport, I increase the starting point by 7½ months. For the aggravating
C factor that the offence was committed whilst on court bail, I increase the C
starting point further by 1½ month to become 24 months’ imprisonment.
D D
E 62. Ms Lai pleaded guilty in good time earning for herself the E
customary 1/3 sentencing discount. For Charge 1 and Charge 2 under
F F
DCCC 936/2024, and for the sole charge under DCCC 1337/2024, because
G of the fact that monetary losses have been recouped or all lost property has G
been recovered, I reduce one more month after the 1/3 reduction. I can
H H
find no other mitigating factors of weight to reduce the sentences further.
I I
63. Although some of the offences were committed on the same
J J
day, all offences were separate and distinct, and none of them was
K concomitant to the others. In principle, their sentences ought to run K
consecutively to one another. However, I will bear in mind the principle
L L
of totality when determining the aggregate sentence under DCCC
M 936/2024 and the final sentence that Ms Lai is to serve under both DCCC M
936/2024 and DCCC 1337/2024. I will also alert myself to the possibility
N N
of an excessive final sentence in light of the fact that the aggravating factor
O of Ms Lai being a persistent offender of theft has been factored into all the O
theft and attempted theft offences herein.
P P
Q (Ms Lai, please stand) Q
R R
64. In the case DCCC 936/2024, the sentences are as follows:
S S
(a) The sentence for Charge 1 is 13 months’ imprisonment.
T T
U U
V V
- 19 -
A A
B B
C (b) The sentence for Charge 2 is 14 months’ imprisonment. C
D D
(c) The sentence for Charge 3 is 14 months’ imprisonment.
E E
(d) The sentence for Charge 4 is one month’s
F F
imprisonment.
G G
(e) The sentence for Charge 5 is one month’s
H H
imprisonment.
I I
65. In DCCC 936/2024, I order that 7 months of the sentence on
J J
Charge 2 and 7 months of the sentence on Charge 3 are each to run
K consecutively to the consecutive sentences of Charges 1, 4 and 5. The K
aggregate sentence under DCCC 936/2024 is therefore 29 months’
L L
imprisonment.
M M
66. In the case DCCC 1337/2024, the sentence for the sole charge
N N
is 15 months’ imprisonment.
O O
67. Finally, I order that 4 months of the sentence under DCCC
P P
1337/2024 is to run consecutively to the aggregate sentence under DCCC
Q 936/2024 of 29 months’ imprisonment. Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 20 -
A A
B B
68. In other words, the final sentence under both DCCC 936/2024
C and DCCC 1337/2024 is 33 months’ imprisonment. C
D D
E E
F F
( Isaac Tam )
G G
District Judge
H H
I I
J J
K K
L L
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V