HKSAR v. Tsang Yin on
|
DCCC 1117/2013 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1117 OF 2013 -----------------------------------
-----------------------------------
---------------------------- Reasons for Sentence ---------------------------- Charge 1.The defendant pleads guilty to wounding with intent, contrary to section 17(a) of the Offences against the Person Ordinance. 2.The defendant was 63 whereas his wife the victim was 32 at the time of the offence. She was the sole breadwinner of the family. They were married 8 years ago and they resided with their daughter, aged 14, in a public housing unit in Tuen Mun. The marital relationship had turned sour since about 3 months before the offence when he suspected her of extra-marital affairs. 3.In the early morning of 3 November 2013, when the victim was bending down to wear her shoes before going to work, she was chopped by the defendant, her husband. In great pain she heard him accuse her of having affairs with others. He was holding a steel chopper (blade length 17.5 cm, entire length 28 cm). He added that she was lucky not to have him chop off her head. The daughter, aged 14, came out of her room. He reported the case to the police by himself. 4.After arrest and caution, he admitted chopping her out of impulsiveness upon knowing that she had extra-marital affairs. 5.In their residence were found 3 notes expressing frustration and loss of love written by him bearing dates shortly before. There was a news clip of a wife wounding her husband because of his extra-marital affairs. 6.In a subsequent video-recorded interview, he maintained the same version and added that he had gone to pick up the chopper from the kitchen when she was about to put on her shoes; he had wanted to disfigure her so that she could not marry again; he had wanted to chop her face but chopped her neck accidentally; he had chopped her 2 to 3 times; she had expressed a wish to divorce from him on a prior occasion; he had written the 3 notes in the hope that she would discontinue her extra-marital affairs; he had wanted to use the news clip to remind her of the consequence of extra-marital affairs. 7.The victim was hospitalized for 2 days. Her medical reports revealed the following findings:
8.From the photos taken by the police shortly after the offence, the wounds were conspicuous on the cheek and the neck, as the case may be. Personal background and mitigation 9.The defendant is 64 now, of primary education level. He has a clear record. He had ceased working since 12 months before the offence due to chronic pain at the lung diagnosed as muculoskeletal chest pain according to his Discharge Slip dated 9 Sep. 2013. He had been a general labourer at the construction site beforehand. 10.His solicitor tells me that the victim had stayed out overnight frequently since 6 months before the offence. The last straw fell as she pre-warned him that she would not be going home for the night. 11.After the offence, the daughter had moved out to reside with her whereas the defendant had not been granted bail throughout. The tenancy was taken out in his name. The victim had no plan to move back to the residence. Upon taking instructions in the presence of the prosecutor from the daughter who is residing with her and in court today, his solicitor informs me that the disfigurement to the victim’s cheek and neck has been lessening by degrees and the scarring is not conspicuous. 12.I have read the mitigating letters from the victim, the daughter and the defendant himself. Sentencing this defendant 13.There are no sentencing tariffs. This is a tragedy of an aged husband losing his head in an attempt to salvage a dooming relationship. He is very much, if not more, a victim of this incident as his wife. 14.The use of extreme violence in an unprovoked domestic scene warrants a severe sentence. It is fair to say, though, that the emotion had been simmering since 6 months ago and hitting the high upon a petty gesture or utterance as the present case features. A notable difficulty in the court’s dealing with a violent spouse is the adverse implications of the sentence for the child still young at age. 15.For this crime of passion, I start with 3 years. I take one-third off for his plea of guilty. I take an extra 4 months off to reflect his previous good character and the destiny of a divorce. His wife has forgiven him and pleaded for leniency. I take another 2 months off. His sentence is 18 months.
|