CRIMINAL CASE NO. 229 OF 2010
COURT: The accused, causing grievous bodily harm with intent is a serious offence for which the maximum penalty is life imprisonment.
The appropriate sentence in each case will depend on the facts of the case.
I have taken into account everything ably urged by your counsel on your behalf.
Although not planned beforehand and although brought on by a sudden onset of rage, what you did was very serious, and it was very dangerous for it was to squeeze the victim’s throat for about two to three minutes, and you did not stop until after she had lost consciousness.
On the latest medical report, which is from the Tai Po Hospital and which both the prosecution and the defence accept as accurate, the position is as follows:
The victim is currently living with her ex-husband. Compassionate rehousing arrangement is under processing by a medical social worker. She is currently on two types of medication for seizure and for myoclonus control. Both sides agree that myoclonus means involuntary twitching of a muscle or groups of muscles.
On assessment, the victim was found to be an unaided walker and independent in her activity of daily living. However, there is persistent upper limb ataxia with no significant improvement since September this year. Both sides agree that ataxia means a neurological symptom consisting of gross lack of control of muscle movement.
The victim has poor bilateral hand function and a highly limited work capacity. Further hand function training is suggested. The victim is also scheduled for review at Alice Ho Miu Ling Nethersole Hospital Neurology Clinic on 13 January 2011, Psychology Clinic on 26 July next year and Ear, Nose and Throat Clinic on 1 August next year. Future disability of the victim needs to be determined by the progress assessment in upcoming training sessions and clinics follow-up.
When a court decides on the appropriate sentence to pass for an offence, one of the things that a court will do is to assess the gravity of the offence, and when making that assessment, the court will consider the consequences to the victim. I have done so. After all, sentence is not only about the general public and the defendant. It is also about the victim.
All things considered, I adopt a starting point of 7 years. Your plea of guilty earns you a reduction of one-third. It is in your favour that you have no previous conviction, but that is a rather limited element of mitigation in your favour.
That you called for an ambulance is a substantial element of mitigation, but not as substantial as it would be if you had called for an ambulance at once or almost at once, rather than waiting as long as you did before doing so.
As I have already stated, I have given consideration to all the mitigation which has been very ably urged on your behalf. For all the mitigation available to you, I give you such reduction as to result in a sentence of 4½ years’ imprisonment.
You will therefore go to prison for 4½ years.