HKSAR v. Lam Chun Kay

HCCC 460/2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 460 OF 2016

-----------------

-----------------

---------------------------------

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

---------------------------------

COURT:

The defendant originally faced one count of murder. Subsequently, as an important witness passed away, the prosecution, having considered the rest of the evidence against the defendant, fairly amended the charge to one of wounding, contrary to section 19 of the Offences Against the Person Ordinance, Cap 212, to which the defendant has now pleaded guilty.

It all arose out of a money dispute. At the material time, the defendant approached the victim, demanding for repayment of a debt of HK$3,000. On hearing that the victim was unable to make repayment, four men came out from a lane and surrounded the victim. The defendant then punched the victim first on his left face, and then on his right, and subsequently a full face punch causing the victim’s nose to bleed. He then picked up a 3-feet-long iron rod from the ground and, after telling a passer-by to mind his own business, pulled the victim to the end of the lane with the other four men.

Later on, the victim went to a nearby restaurant and asked for help. He was seen with a bleeding nose and his face was bruised and swollen. He was rushed to the hospital for emergency treatment.

A week later, the victim was certified dead. Autopsy report revealed that bruises were found over the deceased’s left thigh and leg and injuries on his left face with fracture of the orbit.

The defendant, aged 44, has 25 previous criminal records including offences relating to dishonesty, to dangerous drugs and violence. His last conviction was on 20 January 2016 for possession of dangerous drugs, committed in September 2015, for which he was arrested on 23 September that year. He received 4 months’ imprisonment for that, and the present case was committed whilst he was on bail for that drugs offence.

By way of mitigation, I was told that the defendant had three operations on his stomach back in 2015, and at the time of this offence, he had barely recovered. However, during the altercation over money repayment, he was kicked on his stomach by the deceased and he felt great pain. As a result, he picked up the iron rod which he brought with him originally to threaten the deceased, and used that to hit the deceased.

In sentencing the defendant, I do not lose sight of the fact that had it not been for the death of an important eye-witness, this defendant faced a murder charge which, if convicted, would put him away for life. I cannot think of any facts of a worse scenario than the present case in an unlawful wounding charge. A life was wasted over a debt of $3,000.

In my view, bearing in mind that this defendant has been in remand for 2 years, this case justifies the maximum sentence of 3 years as a starting point. Nonetheless, he is still entitled to a one-third discount for his guilty plea. He is sentenced to 2 years’ imprisonment and taking into account the Prison Rules, no doubt he would be released almost immediately.

May I also say this, that this case is a special case on its own facts and history and the sentence that I pass should not be used as any guideline or tariff for future cases.