HKSAR v. Tang Yi Hang

DCCC 1001/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 1001 OF 2012

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.Defendant was convicted after trial for the charges of acting as a member of a triad society, assault occasioning actual bodily harm and criminal damage.

2.The facts were that there were a group of 10-odd persons, some holding glass bottles went into a cyber café shouting for triad-related persons and then they proceeded to assault a patron’s head with the glass bottles causing him bodily harm and the person was bleeding.  They also threw the computers to the ground resulting in damage.  The boss, holding a chopper, then tried to stop them from leaving by guarding the doorway and a person in the group also claimed as a member of Sun Yee On requesting to leave.  Eventually the group managed to jump from the window at the 1st floor to the ground to escape.  The boss then went down only to find the defendant lying on the ground whom had hurt his ankle and bled.

3.I found the defendant was part of the group acting as a member of the triad society and they had assaulted the patron and damaged the properties in the café causing loss of about $40,000 to $50,000.

4.Defendant aged 23, he has 5 previous criminal convictions including assault occasioning actual bodily harm, possession and trafficking in a dangerous drug where he had been sentenced to 3 years and 4 months’ imprisonment in May 2009 and released in February 2011.

5.In mitigation, Mr Hui submits that there was no direct evidence as to how serious the victim suffered nor to show what part defendant actually played, therefore he submits as if defendant were only playing a small role as a mere soldier and not the mastermind.  However, one must not lose sight of the fact that there was quite a number of attackers, whereas the assault happened in such a small area and that very serious consequence could have resulted. 

6.Defendant was a supervisor earning about $20,000 per month and had been contributing several thousand to the family.  As to compensation, family members though only receiving public assistance is willing to pay half in instalment terms.  And finally, Mr Hui also agrees that the defendant could pay $10,000 as compensation and that could be deducted from the bail sum.

7.The facts of the present case were serious that a group of 10-odd persons, some holding glass bottles, were found attacking a person’s head and damaged properties in the café while there were still other customers therein.  Nonetheless, the victim failed to attend court so we could hardly know further about the extent of his injury but no doubt the act was premeditated and organised.  A group of triad-related persons acting together with weapons must be deterred.  Had it not been the injury, defendant would have had already gone.

8.As to the charges of acting as a member of a triad society and assault occasioning actual bodily harm, taking into account the serious circumstances of the case, I assess that 18 months’ imprisonment of each charge is warranted.  As to criminal damage, 12 months’ imprisonment.

9.For totality principle, I assess that the overall sentence of 2 years would be appropriate. Therefore:

Charge 1: 18 months’ imprisonment;

Charge 2: 18 months’ imprisonment;

Charge 3: 12 months’ imprisonment;

The 2nd and the 3rd charge be run concurrently and 6 months of the 1st charge to make consecutively to the 2nd and 3^rd Charges, making a total of 24 months’ imprisonment.

10.Therefore for all the charges defendant is sentenced to 24 months’ imprisonment. And lastly, by consent I order compensation be made to the victim, $10,000 to be deducted from bail.