HKSAR v. Mok Wong Kin Ming

DCCC 397/2018

[2018] HKDC 1320

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 397 OF 2018

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

Charge and facts

1.The Defendant pleads guilty to a charge of dangerous driving causing grievous bodily harm. 

2.The accident location was at the pedestrian crossing on Wang Tau Hom South Road, near Wang Lok House, Lok Fu Estate, Wong Tai Sin, Kowloon, Hong Kong (the "Pedestrian Crossing"), and involved a private car bearing registration mark MYD3801 ("V1") driven by D, traveling through the red traffic light signal governing her direction, thereby knocking down and causing grievous bodily harm to CHOI Pik-yuk (female, aged 78) ("PW1") who was walking across the Pedestrian Crossing.

3.The material section of Wang Tau Hom South Road is a two-lane, one-way carriageway, and the speed limit is 50 km per hour. The Pedestrian Crossing was controlled by traffic lights. At the time of the accident, the material section of Wang Tau Hom South Road was in good repair and the traffic flow was smooth. The weather was fine and the road surface was dry.

4.At around 10:55 a.m. on 3 October 2017, D drove V1 along Wang Tau Hom East Road, and then turned left onto Wang Tau Hom South Road. Meanwhile, PW1 and two other pedestrians were standing before the Pedestrian Crossing waiting for the pedestrian signal. When the pedestrian signal turned green, V1 was about 3 car lengths away from the Pedestrian Crossing, but D travelled through the traffic lights governing her direction and continued to drive forward at about 20 - 30 km per hour without slowing down. After the pedestrian signal had turned green, PW1 stepped onto the Pedestrian Crossing to cross the road from south to north. However, the Defendant failed to notice PW1 who was walking across the road in front of V1 and continued to drive forward onto the Pedestrian Crossing.  After PW1 walked 3 - 4 steps on the Pedestrian Crossing, the nearside front of V1 hit PW1, and knocked her down. Subsequently, V1 continued to move forward for about 2 car lengths before coming to a complete halt. At all material times, the vehicular signal governing D's direction was red. 8. As a result, PW1 sustained injury to her right leg, including fracture fibula and tibia, and was then conveyed to Queen Elizabeth Hospital in conscious state.

5.In her interview conducted around 12:15 noon to 1:21 p.m. on 3 October 2017, under caution, she stated, inter alia, that:

(a) At the material time, she drove V1 along Wang Tau Hom East Road, and then turned left onto Wang Tau Hom South Road;

(b) V1 was travelling at around 20 to 30 km/h;

(c) When she was driving V1 along Wang Tau Hom East Road, there was a white box truck about 1.5 to 2 car lengths in front of V1;

(d) She followed the said truck to turn left onto Wang Tau Hom South Road;

(e) When she drove V1 past the traffic light, she suddenly heard someone shouting, and then stopped V1 immediately;

(f) At the material time, she did not notice the colour of the traffic light, she saw the said truck moving forward, and followed the said truck;

(g) She heard someone shouting, when the rear of V1 was about 2 feet onto the yellow stripes of the Pedestrian Crossing; and

(h) She did not know how V1 hit PW1.

6.PW1 was sent to the Queen Elizabeth Hospital. On medical examination, it was found that PW1 was suffering from right knee tenderness and swelling. X-ray examination revealed that PW1 had fractured fibula and tibia. The clinical diagnosis was fractured right knee.  PW1 received operations and was then transferred to Kowloon Hospital for rehabilitation on 13 October 2017. Thereafter, PW1 could walk with frame after discharged on 2 December 2017.  Subsequent follow-ups revealed wound healed well and fracture healed. Upon latest review on 4 April 2018, PW1 was able to walk with stick. There was no pain and the range of motion was satisfactory. Physiotherapy would be continued.  She was granted sick leave from 3 October 2017 to 4 April 2018, both dates inclusive.

7.Screening breath test was conducted on the Defendant at the scene with the result of zero reading. The motor vehicle examiner examined V1 and confirmed that V1 had no mechanical defect and no apparent damage defect. 

Mitigation

8.The Defendant is 77 years old.  She has a clear record.  According to her traffic record, she crossed continuous double white line in 7/2012, failing to comply with traffic signal in 12/2016 and 10/2017, and she attended the driving improvement course satisfactorily in 12/2017 as ordered by the Transport Department. 

9.She was a structural engineer and interior designer by occupation.  In 1973 she formed her own company to undertake design projects for clients.  Since the discovery of her husband’s cancer in 2012, she almost stopped working to take care of him.  The business was handed over to her husband’s younger brother. Unfortunately, her husband passed away in 2015.  Her children and grandchildren are living abroad.  She lives alone with her domestic helper.  Her younger brother resides with her mother, who is 106 years old. 

10.She is commended by her nephew, her domestic helper, and her employee as a learned and kind-hearted person.  She made contributions to the charity from 2002 to 2012.

11.The letter from Dr. Poon states that she was diagnosed with liver cancer in 2009.  She had undergone various operations and treatments.  Her condition is temporarily stable though weak and highly susceptible to recurrence.  

12.I am told in mitigation that she did not notice the red traffic light as she drove past the Pedestrian Crossing.  It was a momentary lapse of attention. 

Sentencing this defendant

13.Driving past the green pedestrian light was a serious case of traffic offence.  All complying pedestrians’ safety must be protected.  I consider a term of imprisonment to be called for.  I take 6 months as the starting point.  I give her the one-third discount for her plea of guilty.  The sentence is 4 months.  I am persuaded by her counsel that, apart from the steady recovery of the victim, her old age, her subsisting serious illness at this juncture of her life, which affected her both before and after the passing of her husband in 2015, and her positive clear record, are circumstances which together justify suspension of her sentence.  I order her sentence to be suspended for 3 years.

14.I order her disqualification for 2 years but she has to be re-tested before getting back her driving licence.  This is to protect both herself and other road-users.