HKSAR v. Wong Wah Chiu

DCCC1049/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1049 OF 2010

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to an offence of wounding with intent, contrary to section 17(a) of the Offences against the Person Ordinance, Cap.212, Laws of Hong Kong, the particulars being that you, on 1 July 2006 at Room 7, 13th Floor, Winfair Building, Nos. 6-10B Yuk Wah Crescent, Tsz Wan Shan, Kowloon, unlawfully and maliciously wounded Wong Kin-hung with intent to do him grievous bodily harm.

2.The brief facts which you have agreed are, I find, lacking in detail, particularly as to the confrontation between your common-law wife, Madam Chan, and PW1, the wife of the victim, in the hours before the attack.  There is a disconnect between that and the attack, because whilst PW1 was slightly injured in the course of that confrontation, there is no mention of Madam Chan being in any way aggrieved by PW1 leading you to act in the way that you did.

3.Be that as it may, what has been put before me by way of mitigation by counsel on your behalf, that you acted in some way out of loyalty to your wife as a result of the earlier confrontation between her and PW1, does not in my view operate in any way as mitigation because you struck out viciously against not PW1 but her husband, PW2, who had nothing whatever to do with the earlier incident and, indeed, had no knowledge of it. 

4.This was simply a wicked, unprovoked and completely unwarranted attack on PW2, the victim, who suffered multiple chop wounds to his head, which could have been life-threatening.  The extent of the attack is quite simply demonstrated by referring to the photographs taken by police at the scene showing the profuse amount of blood.  It is no thanks to you that fortunately the victim has fully recovered, save that he has been left with a 3 inch scar on the left side of his face and he has lost the strength in the fingers of his right hand.

5.You had told the probation officer, which is referred to in the background report now before me, that at the material time you saw the victim open the iron gate holding a rod in his hand.  You mistakenly thought that the victim was about to attack your common-law wife. You therefore rushed toward the victim and started to struggle with him, which led to this offence.  I note that through your counsel you now retract this statement.

6.As I have said, this was nothing more than an unwarranted and completely unprovoked attack on the victim, causing him serious injury.

7.In sentencing you I take into account your age and hitherto clear record. 

8.I adopt a starting point of 4½ years’ imprisonment, which I will discount by one-third to take account of your plea of guilty to this offence, arriving at a sentence of 3 years’ imprisonment.