HKSAR v. Chan Sui

DCCC541/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 541 OF 2012

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to wounding with intent contrary to section 17A of the Offences Against a Person Ordinance, Cap.212. You admitted the brief facts, and I convicted you.

2.It is fair to say that those brief facts reveal a rather sad state of affairs.  You are a man of 57, the father of the victim who is aged 18.  You reside together at Herring Gull House, Sha Kok Estate.  At around 8.45 pm on 16 May of this year, the victim and his 10 year old brother who is also your son, were watching TV in the living room while you were asleep in the bedroom.  They had a dispute over the TV and fought against each other. You woke up, came into the living room and struck the victim’s back once.  The victim asked you to stop and not to hit him where upon you became agitated, rushed into the kitchen and took up the chopper.

3.The victim, for his part, took up a 104 centimetre iron rod from his bedroom to defend himself.  The victim left the living room and found you holding a chopper in your right hand.  Without speaking you struck at the victim with the chopper but he dodged the attack. The victim then dropped the iron rod and tried to grab the chopper but you chopped him on the head.  The victim bled profusely from his forehead and left cheek.  The victim then pressed you against a cabinet to prevent further attacks. 

4.PW2, your younger son, saw this and called the police.  PC3366 soon arrived to find you still holding the chopper and struggling with the victim.  He arrested and cautioned you and you claimed the victim assaulted you first.  As you could not beat the victim you took the chopper to defend yourself.  In a subsequent video recorded interview you said the following:

1. You saw your sons fighting and when you asked them to stop, they ignored you.

2. The victim punched you on the back and went to the room to get the iron rod.

3. On seeing this you took the chopper from the kitchen.

4. The victim pointed the rod at you so you grabbed it with one hand and chopped PW1’s head.

5. The victim tried to snatch the chopper unsuccessfully.

6. You grabbed the victim and told your second son to call the police.

5.As a result the victim sustained the following injuries.  A 10 centimetre deep laceration of the forehead extending to the vortex.  A 3 centimetre laceration at the forehead and a 3 centimetre laceration of the left cheek.  The wounds required stitching. 

6.Mr Tong, in mitigation did refer to you being of clear record.  In fact you do have two minor previous convictions of a dissimilar nature.  These you admitted on the last occasion.  In view of the somewhat special circumstance of this case I adjourned the case for a probation officer’s background report.  That is now before me. 

7.Except for the section where you appeared to deny the offence, by claiming the chopper was for self-defence and the injury to your son accidental, you agreed with the facts.  Mr Tong clarified that section.  He told me that initially you had taken the chopper for self protection but used it deliberately to injury the victim as he did not show you respect.  On your behalf Mr Tong proceeded to enter mitigation.  He indicated the presence of various members of your family in court today to show support. Inter alia these included the victim, your wife and the other children.  Mr Tong also produced three letters of support, one from your wife, one from your daughter and one from the victim.

8.The victim expressed his forgiveness and urged leniency on you.  Also Mr Tong made the following points, that you had pleaded guilty; you had received the forgiveness of the victim; your record was light; and that the victim had suffered no permanent damage.  He also made the point that the offence or the incident of that night had actually been a blessing in disguise in that the family had been drawn together.

9.I turn now to the sentence itself.  On the face of it, the bald facts of it, this is a very serious offence involving, as it does, an assault using a deadly weapon.  The injuries to your son cannot be described as trivial to any extent and you accept that you deliberately used the chopper.  Whatever provocation there was this is an unacceptable response.

10.However, having said that this is an unusual and sad case to some extent.  It is a case where there is much by way of mitigation. 

First, you and the victim are close relatives - father and son.

Second - and this is very important - your son has forgiven you and made a plea to this court for a lenient sentence.

Third, in respect to this serious assault there was but one blow, one use of the chopper which was not sustained.

Fourth, there is a large level of provocation in this case in that your elder son was fighting with your younger son and very fairly and properly your son has accepted that he played some part in what took place.

Fifth, you have a relatively light record.

Sixth, it is clear today that you have the support and love of your family.

Seventh, there is the injury is presented as being non-permanent. Fortunately it seems that there will be no permanent scarring.

Eighth, the probation officer’s background presents you in a positive light.

You are clearly not a man of habitual violence although I do note and this seems to be accepted that you have used corporal punishment upon your children in the past.

11.The conclusion I am driven to is this that a prison sentence in these circumstances is inevitable although given all the circumstances I have mentioned this will be lighter than one would normally impose.  In my opinion a lengthy prison sentence would adversely effect your personal rehabilitation and your relationships within the family.  Having said that this court cannot condone the use of a weapon in these circumstances. This goes beyond lawful correction even though you have the forgiveness of your son. 

12.Therefore, in all the circumstances I take as a starting point 12 months imprisonment, reduced to 8 months for your plea of guilty.  You will go to prison for 8 months.