HKSAR v. Wong Pat Tat

Case No.HCCC 168/2012
Court
High Court CFI
Date10 Jan 2013
Judge
Case Document
100%

HCCC 168/2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 168 OF 2012

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

  HKSAR  
  v  
  Wong Pat-tat  
-----------------
Before: DHCJ Wright
Date: 10 January 2013 at 10.06 am
Present: Mr Richard Wong, on fiat, for HKSAR
Mr Michael Arthur, instructed by Peter K H Wong & Co, for the accused
Offence:  Murder (謀殺)

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT: You have now been convicted, on the basis of your own plea and a series of medical reports placed before me from different psychiatrists, of a single charge of manslaughter, the basis that the prosecution accepted that plea being one of diminished responsibility.

The opinion of the psychiatrists is unanimous that at the time you committed this offence you were suffering from paranoid schizophrenia, and that you continue to have problems, including multiple delusions, even at this stage.

It is quite clear from the psychiatric reports, as well as from the tragic events on the day in question themselves, that you are in need of assistance with your psychiatric issues. That is, of course, going to be of small consolation to any of those affected by this event, but it is a matter that does explain why you behaved in the manner in which you did.

Fortunately, I am empowered under the Mental Health Ordinance to make an order that you be confined to a designated institution for treatment. I am empowered both to make an order for a stipulated period as well as for an indefinite period.

It obviously is preferable that your progress in any treatment be monitored, and that you be detained until such time as those with expertise in the field of psychiatry are satisfied that it is in your interests, as well as the interests of the community, that you no longer need to be detained.

The psychiatrists are in agreement that it should be an open‑ended order, an indefinite period, and that seems to me to be the appropriate course to follow in the present circumstances.

I am satisfied that the provisions of the Mental Health Ordinance empowering me to make an order in these terms have now been fulfilled, and consequently, the order that I make here is that you be detained at Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre for an unspecified period of time.