Ng Kum Kit v Public Prosecutor

• Court: District Court (Singapore)
• Judge: Abdul Rahim B A Jalil
• Judgment Date: 08 February 2001
• Neutral Citation: [2001] SGDC 41
• Citation: [2001] SGDC 41
• Published date: 19 April 2005

Ng Kum Kit ...appellant

v

Public Prosecutor ...respondent

Citation:	DAC No 27425-9 of 2000
Jurisdiction:	Singapore
Date:	2001:02:08
	2001:01:15, 2001:01:13, 2001:01:02 - 2001:01:05, 2000:11:29 2000:11:28, 2000:10:16
Court:	Subordinate Courts
Coram:	Abdul Rahim Jalil, District Judge
Counsel:	Peter Ong Lip Cheng (Thomas Loh Partnership) for the appellant
	Leong Kwang Ian (Deputy Public Prosecutor) for the prosecution

JUDGMENT:

Grounds of Judgment

The accused, Ng Kum Kit was convicted after trial of the following charges:

DAC 27425/2000

You, Ng Kum Kit, m/44 yrs. NRIC No. S 0148344 G, are charged that you, on or about the 21^st day of April 1999, at M/s Addilex Communications, 149 Rochor Road #02-27, Fu Lu Shou Complex, Singapore, did dishonestly receive a stolen property to wit, a ‘Ericsson 388’ handphone valued at about S$280/- belonging to one Sim Chun Xiong, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be a stolen property, and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 411 of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.

DAC 27426/2000

You, Ng Kum Kit, m/44 yrs. NRIC No. S 0148344 G, are charged that you, on or about the 24^st day of April 1999, at M/s Addilex Communications, 149 Rochor Road #02-27, Fu Lu Shou Complex, Singapore, did dishonestly receive a stolen property to wit, a ‘Nokia 6110’ handphone valued at about S$500/- belonging to one Wong Hsien Hong, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be a stolen property, and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 411 of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.

DAC 27427/2000

You, Ng Kum Kit, m/44 yrs. NRIC No. S 0148344 G, are charged that you, on or about the 26^st day of April 1999, at M/s Addilex Communications, 149 Rochor Road #02-27, Fu Lu Shou Complex, Singapore, did dishonestly receive a stolen property to wit, a ‘Philip’ handphone valued at about S$550/- belonging to one Loh Chuan Yun, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be a stolen property, and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 411 of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.

DAC 27428/2000

You, Ng Kum Kit, m/44 yrs. NRIC No. S 0148344 G, are charged that you, on or about the 28^th day of April 1999, at M/s Addilex Communications, 149 Rochor Road #02-27, Fu Lu Shou Complex, Singapore, did dishonestly receive a stolen property to wit, a ‘Startac’ handphone valued at about S$535/- belonging to one Chan Di Zhao, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be a stolen property, and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 411 of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.

DAC 27429/2000

You, Ng Kum Kit, m/44 yrs. NRIC No. S 0148344 G, are charged that you, on or about the 30^th day of April 1999, at M/s Addilex Communications, 149 Rochor Road #02-27, Fu Lu Shou Complex, Singapore, did dishonestly receive a stolen property to wit, a ‘Ericsson 337’ handphone valued at about S$300/- belonging to one Chia Yong Peng, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be a stolen property, and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 411 of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.

Evidence adduced by the prosecution

2. Ting Wilson was the main prosecution witness. He testified that he had stolen hand-phones. His modus operandi was that he would approach his victims, accuse them of assaulting his younger brother and then borrow their hand-phones on the pretext of calling his brother. He would then ask them to wait and then he walked away with the hand-phones.

3. Ting Wilson also said that he had sold the stolen hand-phones to the accused. He testified that he started selling stolen hand-phones to the accused sometime in late March 1999. According to him, he had sold some 15 to 20 hand-phones to the accused.

DAC 27425/2000

4. Sim Chun Xiong was a student. In respect of the charge in DAC 24725/2000, he testified that on 21 April 99, Ting Wilson took away his black Ericsson 388 hand-phone. Ting Wilson approached him and asked him to follow him to a fountain at Takashimaya Shopping Centre. Ting Wilson claimed that someone had beaten his brother. Ting Wilson also told Sim his brother saw him and his brother said that he looked like the culprit. He then borrowed Sim’s hand-phone. According to Sim, Ting Wilson wanted to call his brother to confirm if he was the person who had beaten his brother. Ting Wilson then walked away with the hand-phone to the linkway between Wisma Atria and Takashimaya Shopping Centre. Sim tried to follow Ting Wilson but lost track of him. Sim estimated the value of the hand-phone to be around $280.

5. Ting Wilson confirmed that on that day, i.e. 21 April 1999, he misappropriated an Ericcson 388 hand-phone belonging to Sim Chun Xiong. He then called the accused to negotiate the price of the hand-phone. Having negotiated the price, he walked to the accused’s shop at Fu Lu Shou Complex. Upon reaching the accused’s shop, he gave the phone to the accused, collected his money and left. He could not remember the price he was paid as he had sold the accused many Ericsson 388 hand-phones.

DAC 2726/2000

6. As for the charge in DAC 2726/2000, Wong Hsien Hong who was also a student testified that on 24 April 99, he was at Takashimaya Shopping Centre with a friend. A man came to him and claimed that his friend had beaten up his brother the previous week. The man then asked for a hand-phone. Wong offered to lend the man his hand-phone. The man then told Wong to sit down as the matter did not concern him and went away with his friend. When his friend did not return after five minutes, Wong went to look for him. He found his friend outside a shop. The friend told him that while he bent down to retrieve his keys which he had dropped. The man went off with Wong’s hand-phone. Wong could not identify the man who took his hand-phone. He said his mother had bought the hand-phone at the price of $500.

7. Ting Wilson gave evidence that the hand-phone that he took from Wong Hsien Hong on that day was a Nokia 6110. After he had taken the hand-phone, he made a call to the accused using the stolen hand-phone. He proceeded to the accused’s shop with a friend called Rosli. When he was at the accused’s shop, he handed the hand-phone to the accused and collected the money. He could also not remember how much he was paid for the hand-phone.

DAC 2727/2000

8. On DAC 2727/2000, Loh Chuan Yun, another student, testified that on 26 April 99, at Dhoby Ghaut MRT Station, his blue Philip hand-phone valued at $580 was taken way by a man. He identified Ting Wilson to be this man.

9. Ting Wilson said that after taking the hand-phone, he used the hand-phone to call the accused. However, the accused was not in his shop. He then waited for the accused at the lobby of Allson Hotel. He called the accused again and on this occasion the accused was in his shop. He went to the accused’s shop and handed the hand-phone to the accused. He then collected the money and left.

DAC 2728/2000

10. As for DAC 2728/2000, another student, Chan Di Zhao, testified that on 28 April 99 he was at Funan Centre with his friend when Ting Wilson approached him and told him that his brother was beaten by his friend. Ting Wilson asked Chan’s friend if he knew his girlfriend who was from Springfield Secondary School. According to Chan, his friend knew Ting Wilson. Chan related in his police report that he handed over his Startac hand-phone to Ting Wilson as the latter wanted to borrow it. Ting Wilson then walked away with his hand-phone. According to Chan, his mother bought the hand-phone for $535.

11. Ting Wilson testified that he sold this hand-phone to the accused. He said that after stealing it, he called the accused using the hand-phone and negotiated the price. The accused offered to buy the hand-phone. The parties negotiated on the price. Finally, both agreed to the sale price of $280.

DAC 2729/2000

12. Chia Yong Peng, also a student, testified that with regard to the charge in DAC 2729/2000, on 30 April 99 at Suntec City Amusement Centre, his Ericsson 337 hand-phone valued at $300 was taken away from him without his permission. He identified Ting Wilson as the person who had taken the hand-phone.

13. This hand-phone was also sold to the accused. Ting Wilson testified that he contacted the accused using this hand-phone and the accused informed him that he was closing his shop. He persuaded the accused and the accused agreed to wait for him. The accused offered to pay $50 for the hand-phone.

Evidence of Liang and Yap

14. The prosecution also adduced evidence through two other witnesses, Liang Yong Zhong and Yap Yi Wei. Their evidence was that Liang lost his Ericsson 688 hand-phone on 5 April 99. About a week after the loss, he went to look for a new hand-phone with his friend Yap. They decided to shop at Fu Lu Shou building. They went to the accused’s shop which was on the second storey of the building. As they were looking around the shop, Yap noticed Liang’s hand-phone at the display cabinet. Liang requested to accused to allow him to look at the hand-phone. After examination, Liang was sure that the hand-phone was the one which he lost and he accordingly informed the accused.

15. The accused wanted Liang to prove that the hand-phone was his. Liang told the accused that he had lodged a police report and he also had the purchase form but both reports were not with him then. The accused then told Liang that he had an appointment and told him to return in the evening.

16. Liang then went home to retrieve the police report and purchase form. He returned to the accused’s shop and showed the police report and the purchase form to a female shop assistant. When the female assistant was looking through the police report and the purchase form, the accused came over. The female assistant then took the hand-phone and keyed in some codes to reveal the serial number of the...