DCCC 151/2024

[2024] HKDC 1457

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 151 OF 2024

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

1. The Defendant pleaded guilty to a single charge of arson, contrary to sections 60(1) and (3) and 63(2) of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap 200 . He had set fire at the school where his cohabitant girlfriend had been working at, in the evening of the day that his girlfriend had resigned due to tension at work with the secretary of the school.

2. The Defendant admitted that his girlfriend had told him about being bullied by colleagues at work prior to and on the day of the offence. He had therefore planned the attack in order to threaten the school and to exact revenge for his girlfriend, but the plans were made on his own, and were not disclosed to her. He had parked his car about 160 m from the school, and had carried 2 cans of thinner and 2 glass bottles with him. When he arrived at the school on foot, he made 2 petrol bombs on site by pouring thinner into emptied beer glass bottles and igniting tissue paper that was stuffed into the bottles.

3. He intended to throw the petrol bombs onto the ground right outside the school office, but the first one accidentally bounced off and landed onto the School Principal’s car, i.e. the damaged property in question, and caused it to be burnt. The Defendant threw the 2 petrol bombs at around 2213 hours towards the open space from outside the fence of the school. The Defendant had changed his outfit before committing the offence, and had discarded the clothes and the pair of gloves that he had worn during the offence into a garbage dump.

4. The School Principal’s car was found by a passerby to be on fire and a report was made at around 2242 hours. Fire Services officers extinguished the fire at 2245 hours. The car was seriously damaged due to the fire which had lasted approximately half an hour. It was a Lexus IS 250, and was bought by the Principal from his sister at the price of $160,000.

The Defendant’s Antecedent Statement and Mitigation

5. The Defendant is 44 years old, and had been in a long term relationship with his cohabitant girlfriend. Prior to remand, he was the head chef of Palm Spring Residence Club. He has 1 previous conviction record, consisting of 3 charges of burglary and 1 charge of arson in 1999, for which he was sentenced to a Training Centre Order.

6. Defence submitted that there was no serious risk of danger to life, and that there was an absence of triad and public order elements in the offence. It was also submitted that the Defendant had no attempt to disguise himself by wearing a mask. It was pleaded by the Defence that the Defendant had a misplaced loyalty towards his girlfriend, which was the motive for commission of the offence. It was submitted that the previous conviction of arson was related to burning implicating evidence in the burglary.