HKSAR v. WONG CHAU WAH

HCCC 249/2025

[2026] HKCFI 1245

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 249 OF 2025

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

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

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

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

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

COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty to one count of wounding with intent, contrary to section 17(a) of the Offences against the Person Ordinance, Cap 212.

On 28 June 2024, at about 1 pm, the defendant used a 28‑centimetre long boning knife which he bought from a shop in Sham Shui Po at $400 two hours earlier. The defendant stabbed on the chest of the victim who was at that time lying on his bed watching TV. The victim and the defendant were both residents of Wa Tai Golden Age Home in Causeway Bay where the attack happened.

There was a struggle between the defendant and the victim during the attack in which the victim kept grabbing the defendant’s hands to prevent the defendant from further hurting him. At the time of the attack, the defendant shouted, “You accuse me, I stab you to death”. The struggle lasted for two to three minutes. After, the staff came over to separate them.

The staff reported to the police and under caution the defendant told the police that the victim used a rod to attack him and so he needed to revenge.

As result of the attack, the victim suffered from a 5‑centimetre laceration at right anterior chest wall, 2‑centimetre lacerations over bilateral upper eyelids and right lateral brow, and then 1.5‑centimetre laceration over right thumb. CT scan shows there are right scalp swelling and also cheekbone fracture. He was admitted to the surgical department for treatment and subsequently discharged on 1 July 2024. The defendant suffered cut wound on left index and middle fingers, laceration on left forearm and abrasion on left hand.

The defendant is now 78 years old. The victim was then 66. In mitigation, Mr Hui, counsel for the defendant, submitted that the defendant suffered from schizophrenia since 1990s. The defendant had two previous similar offences for which he was sentenced for imprisonment of 14 days and 12 months in psychiatric treatment centre respectively in 2013 and 2014.

In view of the mental health condition of the defendant and his previous records, I found it is necessary to call for a psychiatrist report and a background report of the defendant for consideration which are now available before me.

The background report revealed that the defendant has had a very stable and simple employment history. He was born in Guangzhou and migrated to Hong Kong when he was eight. After completing his primary education in Hong Kong, he joined the workforce as an assistant at a garment factory and then changed to become a bus driver in late 1970s. Working as a bus driver for 13 years, the defendant resigned due to his mental condition and sleeping problem. He was then 42 years old and thereafter he did not join the workforce again.

The defendant has been single all and living together with his mother until she passed away. He used to be staying at a rented unit in Sham Shui Po until 2014 when he was sentenced to Siu Lam Psychiatric Treatment Centre for a similar offence. He started to reside at Wa Tai Golden Age Home after discharge with the help of a social worker in December 2015. The defendant maintained a close relationship with his elder sister who kept visiting him once a week at Golden Age Home and even after he was remanded for the present offence.

According to the psychiatrist report of the defendant, he was known to be suffering from schizophrenia from 1990, presenting with auditory hallucinations and paranoid beliefs. He had been attending psychiatric follow-up at the Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital Outpatient Clinic and was prescribed of drugs treating schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. However, the defendant strongly denied before the probation officer that he suffered from schizophrenia and insisted that he suffered depression instead.

According to Ms Ling, superintendent of Golden Age Home, as the defendant showed strong self-care capability and mobility, she had no idea of him suffering from mental disease. According to Ms Ling, the defendant has been a polite and gentle person. He greeted staff every day and expressed his thankfulness to staff after being served. He even would proactively assist staff to support other residents. His helpful attitude and co-operative character was highly appreciated. He also observed the rules and regulations of the home strictly.

On the other hand, the victim was bad-tempered and bedridden. He always scold other residents close to his bed with foul language and swat others by his stick, especially the defendant who occupied a bed next to him. The defendant would usually go out for a walk after being badly treated by the victim and Ms Ling would pacify the defendant. Ms Ling was sad to know of the defendant’s conviction and emphasised that the defendant all along adopted a tolerant attitude towards the victim’s provoking behaviour. The victim was discharged from the home after the incident. He asked for a lenient sentence from this court.

The probation officer was impressed that the defendant was gentle and courteous during the interview. The defendant frankly admitted his wrongdoings in responding to the victim’s persistent harsh acts by violence. He recognised that he should seek for the intervention of home staff or the police on being hit by the victim. He promised that he would not solve problems by violence again and he misses his sister very much. He also asked for leniency from this court.

There is no guideline in sentencing for this kind of offence. As submitted by Mr Hui, the usual sentences range from 3 to 12 years’ imprisonment (HKSAR v Chan Chun Tat [2013] 6 HKC 225). In the present offence, the defendant went out to buy a boning knife for attacking the victim. The attack was premeditated. The defendant aimed at the victim’s chest and the attack lasted for two to three minutes. It was only pure luck that the injuries of the victim was not too serious.

On the other hand, the victim had been treating the defendant badly for a period of time. I accept that the grievances of the defendant had accumulated and on the date of the offence, it reached the limit of the defendant. There existed a certain degree of constant provocation from the victim towards the defendant.

Although there are two previous similar convictions of the defendant, they happened 10 years ago and the second one was apparently related to his mental condition which resulted in a hospital order.

As revealed from the information and opinion provided by Ms Ling and the probation officer, the defendant was not a violent person and on the contrary he has been polite and well behaved, also willing to help others. The defendant now recognised it is not the right way to resolve anything with violence. And I am satisfied that the chance of reoffending is not high. In the circumstances, I am of the view that a starting point of 4 years’ imprisonment is appropriate.

Taking into account his guilty plea, the sentence should be reduced to 32 months’ imprisonment.

The defendant is now 78 years old. Although he has two previous convictions, he has been living a simple working life before he quitted his job due to his illness. His health has been deteriorating after the incident and he now suffers from various disease, including hypertension, gout, left frontal meningioma, urinary tract infection, and cellulitis of the left foot. He is wheelchair bound and needed to be dependent on a urine bag.

Taking into account the above factors, I give a further reduction of 6 months on the defendant’s sentence.

The defendant is therefore sentenced to 2 years and 2 months’ imprisonment.