Ng Ying (F) v. The Queen
|
CACC001241/1977
-----------------
----------------- Coram: Huggins and Pickering, JJ.A. and McMullin, J. Date of Judgment: 10th January, 1978. ----------------- JUDGMENT ----------------- 1. This appeal is against a sentence of five years' imprisonment on a charge of using an instrument with intent to procure miscarriage. The appellant, a woman, came to Hong Kong from China in 1962 and, it being said that she received some training as a medical practitioner in China, has practised medicine in Hong Kong since that time. Her counsel has suggested that she is not a professional abortionist whilst conceding that she is by no means an amateur; her counsel would place her in the category of semi-professional. We are unable to agree. The fact that the victim in this case knew where to go to obtain an abortion and the nature of the equipment in the appellant's clinic lead us to the view that she was a professional abortionist. The results of her ministrations upon the eighteen-year-old girl who sought her help are more horrible than anything the members of this court have previously experienced in this type of case. A few hours after leaving the appellant's clinic the girl was taken to Queen Elizabeth Hospital where the doctor who examined her described her as near death; his diagnosis was criminal abortion, perforated womb and haemoperitoneum, that is to say the peritoneal cavity was filled with 2 ½ litres of blood; there was a laceration of 3 inches in length on the anterior uterine wall; several foetal parts were found in the uterus together with several pieces of placental tissue and the whole of the small bowel except for about five feet was gangrenous and one part was completely torn away at one end. Two operations were performed upon the victim who had miraculously retained consciousness throughout the treatment, described by the doctor at Queen Elizabeth Hospital as butchery, inflicted upon her by the appellant and who, despite her condition, was then cynically and unceremoniously placed in a taxi with the admonition to tell nobody especially the police about what had happened since otherwise both she and the appellant would get into trouble. 2. We were referred by Mr. Sedgwick, for the appellant, to various cases in England referred to in Thomas' Principles of Sentencing. We will say no more about those cases than that the general impression which they conveyed to each member of this court was that sentences in England for this type of offence appear to be lenient. The sentence in this case was undoubtedly a heavy one but the offence was quite the worst of its type which this court has encountered and we do not feel that we would be justified in interfering with the sentence. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. Representation: A.W. Sedgwick (Walter Woo & Co.) for appellant. I.H. Polson for Crown/respondent. |