HKSAR v. Yau Wai Wang

DCCC 241/2019

[2019] HKDC 1477

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 241 OF 2019

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

Charge

1.The Defendant pleads guilty to a charge of wounding with intent, contrary to section 17(a) of the Offences against the Person Ordinance, Cap. 212. 

Facts

2.The Defendant, male Ng Chun-pong (“PW1”) and female Lok Chau-tung (“PW2”) were acquainted. At the material time, PW2 was the ex-girlfriend of the Defendant, they broke up in November 2018. PW1 and PW2 were just ordinary friends.

3.On 20 December 2018 at around 4pm, PW1 went alone into a game arcade ‘Sands Game Centre”, Ground Floor, Nos. 24-28 Yuen Long Tai Hang Street, Yuen Long, New Territories, in Hong Kong (the “Game Centre”) and started playing games himself.

4.Around 20 minutes later, PW2 arrived at the Game Centre and sat next to PW1. A few minutes later, the Defendant arrived at the Game Centre and started arguing with PW2. Moments later, the Defendant even started scolding PW1 while initially they were separated by a table in between them.

5.The Defendant kept scolding and walking towards PW1, and then took out a red plastic bag containing a hammer from the back. The Defendant then hit PW1’s head 3 times using the hammer.

6.After the assault, PW1 started bleeding and was sent to hospital. Medical doctor found a 2 cm laceration wound and haematoma over PW1’s left side of head, tenderness over nasal bridge.  He was discharged from hospital the same day.

7.On 21 December 2018 at 00:54am, police attended the residence of the Defendant and arrested him. Under caution, the Defendant stated that he hit PW1 using the handle of the hammer because PW1 disturbed his conversation with PW2. The Defendant further said under caution that he bought that hammer earlier that day for work, he had thrown away the hammer in the street after the assault. Originally he went to the Game Centre just to find PW2 to chat, but he then lost his temper and assaulted PW1 after he disturbed the conversation. 

8.At the material time, the Defendant, at the Game Centre, unlawfully and maliciously wounded PW1 with intent to do him grievous bodily harm.

Mitigation

9.The Defendant is 43 years of age, of F. 3 education level.  He last worked as a renovation worker.  He is the sole breadwinner of his family of five, comprising his parents, his wife and their 6-year-old son.  He had a lot of criminal records.  Relating to violence were Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm (sentenced to jail in 1996 and 2005 respectively), Common Assault (sentenced to jail in 2006, 2012, 2015 and 2017 respectively), and Wounding (sentenced to jail in 2014).  He is a persistent offender for violence offences.  This is an aggravating feature in his sentence. 

10.His counsel Mr. Chang refers me to five cases.  The first one is HKSAR v Kan Wai Man [2004] HKEC 945.  There the defendant’s former girlfriend had become the victim’s current girlfriend.  When she met up with the defendant to return items, they argued.  The victim intervened.  The defendant then used a knife or sharp instrument to stab the victim.  When the victim tried to flee, three to four people, one holding a bottle, joined in the pursuit.  The defendant stabbed him again and lifted him off the ground.  He was repeatedly stabbed on his back.  The victim suffered serious injuries, none permanent though.  The Court of Appeal regarded the starting point of 6 years on the high side but not manifestly excessive.  

11.In HKSAR v Yuen Wai Kui [2005] HKEC 630, the defendant met up with the former boss to repay a debt.  They argued.  The boss attacked the defendant first.  The defendant then attacked the boss with fists and feet continuously even after the boss had fallen to the ground.  The boss suffered severe head injury and was likely to remain in a vegetable state for life.  The Court of Appeal regarded the defendant’s attack unpremeditated with provocation by the victim.  The starting point was reduced from 15 years to 7 ½ years. 

12.In HKSAR v Tse Hok Lam [2002] CHKEC 539, in a premeditated attack, the defendant, who was of limited intelligence, stabbed the victim’s back and neck with a chopper.  He also wounded her shoulder with the chopper.  The victim had recovered fully at the time of sentence.  The Court of Appeal reduced the starting point from 9 years to 6 years. 

13.In Secretary for Justice v Hau Ping Chuen [2008] 3 HKC 398, in a premeditated revenge attack, the defendant tried to stab the victim with a knife.  The victim fended off two of the stabbing motions but cut by the knife on the abdomen.  The defendant caused a cutting wound on the victim’s groin after the victim slipped and fell.  The Court of Appeal increased the starting point from 27 months to 5 years. 

14.The last one is Secretary for Justice v Yu Yat Sang [2011] 1 HKC 155.  The defendant there was a fisherman.  He played mahjong with other fishermen on a fishing vessel.  He lost some money and had an argument with PW1, one of them. There followed a struggle.  He reported the matter to the police.  The matter was then settled.   After five hours, whilst PW1 and another person, PW2, were sleeping on PW1’s vessel, the defendant attacked PW1 with a chopper.  PW1’s ear was largely cut through with a large cut at the side of the neck.  PW1 was the victim of a section 17 wounding charge whereas PW2 was the victim to a section 19 wounding charge.  The Court of Appeal regarded that a starting point of 5 ½ years and 1 ½ years respectively would have to be taken. 

Sentencing this Defendant

15.It was an un premeditated attack. The handle of the hammer was not as powerful as its head. The injury was serious but had no permanent adverse effect. On such facts I consider 2 years 9 months as the starting point. There is a call for a more deterrent sentence in view of the Defendant’s persistent records for violence. I add 3 months to the starting point. The actual starting point is 3 years. After a one-third discount for the plea of guilty, the sentence is 2 years.