HKSAR v. Au Yeung Ka Wai and Another
Read the full judgment text of DCCC 317/2022 on BabelCite. This District Court judgment was delivered on 5 October 2023.
1. D1 and D3 plead guilty to the following charges:
Cites 3 cases
|
DCCC 317/2022 [2023] HKDC 1413 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO 317 OF 2022 ________________________
________________________
________________________ REASONS FOR SENTENCE ________________________ Charges 1.D1 and D3 plead guilty to the following charges:
Facts The events constituting Charge 1 (wounding with intent, against D1 and D3 and others) 2.In early July 2020, X came to know D2 via a dating application. They had consensual sexual intercourse in July and August 2020. After that they did not contact each other. 3.On 21 July 2020, X asked D2 to meet up in a room at Kowloon Hotel. At around 1930 hours, when X and D2 were inside the room, D2 said that she wanted to order takeaway. She opened the door for D1, D3 and two unknown males (“Male A” and “Male B”). D2 left the room. 4.After the four entered the room, D3 stood next to the door and while holding a folding knife of around 10 cm in length. Male A and Male B accused X of having an affair with D2. D1, Male A and Male B then assaulted X barehanded for about 10 minutes. During the assault, Male A searched X’s backpack and found X’s wallet while held the folding knife and looking at X without taking part in the assault. The events constituting Charge 3 (blackmail, against D1 and D3 and others) and Charge 4 (against D1 and D3 and others) 5.After the assault, D1 removed X’s shorts and took nude photos of X with a mobile phone. D1 demanded $50,000 as that X could leave. X replied that he did not have the money. D1 asked X to called X’s friends to pay but to no avail. Male A asked X to write a debt note for $50,000 containing X’s personal information and an admission of having an affair with X, another person’s wife. Male A and Male B assaulted X when X was writing the debt note. 6.Afterwards, D1 used X’s phone to call X’s friends but to no avail. D1 told X that he would cut X’s foreskin if X could not pay. At this juncture, D3 was still holding the folding knife. X was afraid that D1 would publish X’s nude photos if X did not pay D1. 7.At around 2130 hours, ie, 2 hours after their entry into the room, the four left the room. X checked his wallet and found the loss of $2,000 cash, his HKID card and his Octopus card, which had its $200 remaining value gone missing. 8.X attended the hospital and was diagnosed to have redness and bruising on his left lower eyelid, and laceration on the back of his scalp and left lower eyelid. Six stitches were applied to the laceration. CCTV footage 9.The CCTV footage captured as follows:
Nude photos and nude video clip of X 10.Two nude photos and a 13-second nude video clip of X were found in D1’s phone. What D1 and D3 told the police 11.After arrest and caution by the police:
12.In the cautioned VRIs:
Mitigation 13.D1 is 34 years of age. In 2021, he lost his job as a truck driver. He is married to D2. They have separated since end of 2020. They have a 7-year-old son and a 5-year-old daughter. 14.He has several criminal records involving assaults of various degrees and theft. The last of them was in 2016 for assaulting a police officer for which he was sentenced to 2 months’ imprisonment. It was already 4 years 10 months before the present offences. I do not consider his previous records a ground for aggravating his sentence here. 15.D3 is 50 years of age. He has several criminal records involving violence and dishonesty. The last of them was in 2015 for assaulting occasioning actual bodily harm for which he was sentenced to DATC. It was already 5 years 7 months before the present offences. I do not consider his previous records a ground for aggravating his sentence here. 16.He was asked by his friend D1 to assault X for having sex with D2. After the offences, he received $200 as D1’s repayment for his loan made to D1 beforehand. Sentencing considerations 17.In HKSAR v Tung Pak Fai [2022] HKCA 1470, the Court of Appeal summarized the relevant factors when sentencing wounding with intent case:
18.In HKSAR v Ma Tik Lun Dicky, CACC 112/2013, the Court of Appeal summarized the aggravating factors for sentencing wounding with intent cases as follows:
Sentencing D1 and D3 19.D1 was the instigator of all offences. He was motivated by jealousy, greed and anger. His plan was to wound and blackmail X to be reinforced by recruiting D3 and the two unknown males. 20.On Charge 1 (wounding with intent), I take a starting point of 36 months as it was committed with premeditation, with 4 people including himself, on and off for 2 hours from 1930 hours to 2130 hours, resulting in 6 stitches to be applied to X’s wound at the hospital. After the one-third discount for his plea of guilty, the sentence is 24 months. 21.On Charge 3 (blackmail), X was subject to assault and humiliation of nude photo and video taking for ransom of $50,000 and the need to provide personal information on the debt note. I take a starting point of 24 months. After the one-third discount for his plea of guilty, the sentence is 16 months. 22.On Charge 4 (theft), I take a starting point of 12 months. After the one-third discount for his plea of guilty, the sentence is 8 months. 23.By totality, I make an order for 2 months each of Charges 3 and 4 to be consecutive to the 24 months on Charge 1. The total sentence is 28 months. 24.D3 was recruited by D1 to wound and blackmail X. His role was to hold a folding knife to guard X as the other three manhandled X. He was as much culpable as the others in the physical acts. 25.On Charge 1 (wounding with intent), I take a starting point of 30 months. After the one-third discount for his plea of guilty, the sentence is 20 months. 26.On Charge 3 (blackmail), I take a starting point of 21 months. After the one-third discount for his plea of guilty, the sentence is 14 months. 27.On Charge 4 (theft), I take a starting point of 9 months. After the one-third discount for his plea of guilty, the sentence is 6 months. 28.By totality, I make an order for 2 months each of Charges 3 and 4 to be consecutive to the 20 months on Charge 1. The total sentence is 24 months.
|
Cases cited in this judgment
Further hearings and rulings under DCCC 317/2022