HKSAR v. Lau Kwok Chung, Barry

DCCC 1195/2011

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1195 OF 2011

____________

____________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

The defendant pleaded guilty to 3 charges of "Wounding" (Charges 1 to 3) and 1 charge of "Possession of a dangerous drug" (Charge 4). The dangerous drug involved is methamphetamine.

Summary of Facts

2.Madam YUNG Kwei Ying (PW1) is the defendant's mother.  She and the defendant resided in a flat on 12/F, Hang Yee House, Cheung Hang Estate, Tsing Yi ("Location 1").

3.Madam TSOI Chu (PW2) and her grandson Mr. SZE Chung Mang (PW3) resided in a flat on 6/F, Hang Yee House ("Location 2").  Prior to this case, they did not know the defendant or PW1.

Charge 1

4.In the morning on 27 August 2011, the defendant began to display abnormal behaviour.  He shouted at PW1 saying she was not his mother.  The defendant also kept speaking nonsense at the television set.

5.About 6:40 pm on the same day, the defendant became outraged for no apparent reason.  He yelled at PW1 saying she was not his mother.  Suddenly, the defendant grabbed an aluminum towel hanger and used it to hit PW1's left forehead causing her to bleed.  He then ran out of Location 1 with a plastic box containing his belongings and a football.

6.PW1 (aged 56) was found to have a 1 cm laceration over her forehead with a 2x3 cm swelling and active oozing.  The wound was closed by suturing.  She was discharged from the hospital on the same day.

Charges 2 and 3

7.About 7:00 pm on the same day, the defendant shouted outside Location 2 requesting to enter the flat. PW3 saw the defendant holding a plastic box and misunderstood him as a delivery worker.  He opened the door for the defendant.

8.Upon entering Location 2, the defendant claimed that someone had chopped and harmed him.  He asked PW3 to call the Police.  PW3 went to his bedroom to phone his father, whilst PW2 tried to calm the defendant down.  Suddenly, the defendant took off his upper clothes and went to the kitchen to get a chopper (1 foot long).  He swung the chopper towards PW2's head.  PW2 managed to catch the chopper with both hands.  PW3 saw the attack and joined subduing the defendant.  PWs 2 and 3 pressed the defendant on the floor and then fled Location 2.  They ran downstairs and called the Police.  The defendant, however, remained at Location 2.

9.About 7:15 pm, the Police arrived at Location 2.  The Police broke open the door and found the defendant sitting on a sofa in the living room.  He was arrested.

10.PW2 (aged 69) was found to have 1 superficial laceration over her right wrist with no oozing.  Small area of bruise was noted over the medial side of her left palm.  There was mild tenderness over her left temporal region with no swelling or abrasion.  PW2 was treated and discharged from the hospital on the same day.

11.PW3 (aged 15) was found to have a 2.5 cm deep laceration over his left palm near the base of his left thumb.  The wound was sutured with layers under aseptic technique.  PW3 was discharged from the hospital on the same day.

Charge 4

12.The Police also conducted investigation at Location 1.  Upon search, DSPC 49309 found in the defendant's room 2 plastic bags which contained traces of a powder containing methamphetamine; 2 torn plastic bags containing traces of a powder containing methamphetamine; and 1 segment of plastic straw containing traces of a powder containing methamphetamine.

13.In an interview held on 29 August 2011, the defendant admitted under caution that he assaulted the PWs under the influence of dangerous drugs.  Regarding Charge 1, the defendant claimed that he inhaled ICE and had hallucinations.  He saw a man who would harm him.  He took an object, which seemed to be a hanger, and used it to hit that man.  He then realized that he had hit his mother's head and that she was bleeding.  He left Location 1.

14.Regarding Charges 2 and 3, the defendant claimed that he was under the influence of drugs and had hallucinations.  He went to Location 2.  He saw an old lady and a young person.  He asked them to call the Police because he was chopped and harmed by someone, but the young person ignored him.  The defendant picked up a chopper to threaten the young person.  The old lady tried to calm him down but the young person rushed towards him.  Finally, all 3 of them had a struggle and fell onto the floor.  All of them sustained injuries.  He had no intention to hurt the old lady or the young person.

15.The defendant has also admitted that all the dangerous drugs found at Location 1 belonged to him.

Mitigation & Sentence

16.The defendant is now 28 and has a clear record.  In view of his alleged drug abuse, I called for a DATC Report.  The report indicates that he is not a drug dependant.  Defence counsel Mr. MA submitted that the defendant is remorseful.  He realizes his foolishness and the seriousness of the offences.  Fortunately, as confirmed by the Prosecution, none of the victims has any permanent disability or requires any long-term treatment.  Letters from the defendant's mother and cousin have been placed before me; their contents are duly noted.

17.Charges 1 to 3 arose from the defendant's abuse of dangerous drugs.  As a result, he injured his mother and 2 innocent neighbours who were complete strangers to him.  All 3 offences could have been avoided had the defendant not taken any drugs.  He must shoulder all the blame and be punished accordingly.  Furthermore, weapons were used in all 3 charges, especially Charges 2 and 3 (in which a lethal weapon was used).  Immediate custodial sentences are unavoidable.

18.For Charge 1, I adopt a starting point of 9 months' imprisonment.  One-third discount is given for the guilty plea, reducing the sentence to 6 months.  For Charges 2 and 3, I adopt a starting point of 15 months' imprisonment each.  One-third discount is given for the guilty pleas, reducing the sentence to 10 months each.  For Charge 4, I adopt a starting point of 6 months' imprisonment.  One-third discount is given for the guilty plea, reducing the sentence to 4 months.  Apart from his guilty pleas, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further discount.

19.After considering the totality principle, I order the sentences of Charges 1 to 4 to run in the following manners :-

(i) Charges 2 and 3 concurrently;

(ii) 4 months in Charge 1 consecutive to Charges 2 and 3; and

(iii) Charge 4 consecutive to Charges 1 to 3.

Thus, arriving at a total prison term of 18 months for all 4 charges.