HKSAR v. WONG PAK TING

HCCC 40/2026

[2026] HKCFI 4729

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 40 OF 2026

______________

______________

_________________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

_________________________________

1.  The defendant pleaded guilty to 4 counts of attempted murder[1] before Magistrate Ms. Minnie Wat and was committed, on 22 January 2026, to the Court of First Instance for sentence. The defendant confirmed his pleas and admissions before me and his convictions were duly recorded.

2.  Particulars of the 4 counts are that the defendant, on or about 25 June, 2024, at Room C501 of a housing estate in Hong Kong attempted to murder his wife and their 3 daughters.

FACTS

3.  The 3 victims in counts 2, 3 and 4 were aged 16, 15 and 13 respectively.  The defendant and their mother, the victim in count 1, divorced in 2013 but had reconciled in early 2024, and the 5 of them had since been living together in Room C501.

4.  Room C501 was about 310 square feet, with a living room, kitchen, bathroom and 3 bedrooms.  At 6:16 am on 26 June 2024, officers of the Fire Services Department responded to a fire report there and saw upon arrival that the main door and windows were left open, and that there was no fire or smoke inside the room.  The mother and the 3 daughters were conscious and able to respond normally.

5.  Upon investigation, there were signs of burning on the dining table, the floor of the living room corridor, and on the floor of the mother’s bedroom.  

6.  Some charcoal ashes were found in the kitchen sink, together with a stainless steel bowl containing some water and charcoal ashes.  A piece of packing tape was found on the door frame of the kitchen.

7.  Police officers arrived at Room C501 at around 8:50 am and seized the following items.  From the kitchen, some leftovers including noodles and meatballs and bubble teas, a plastic bag containing wet charcoal, a stainless steel bowl with water inside, and a frying pan and a pot each with a burnt bottom were seized.

8.  From the corridor between the washroom and the kitchen, a roll of packing tape and a recycled bag containing a bag of charcoal were seized.

9.  From the dining table, two pieces of charcoal, and from two rubbish bins, a rubbish bag with some packing tape and another two rolls of packing tape.  

10.  The leftovers were examined and found to contain the chemicals mirtazapine and zolpidem, which are poisons listed in Part I of the Poisons List of the Pharmacy and Poisons Regulations, Cap. 138A, possession of which is prohibited unless authorized by law.

11.  The 5 large cups of bubble tea were found to contain diazepam and lorazepam, which are dangerous drugs under the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap.134, possession of which is also prohibited unless authorized by law.

INJURIES SUFFERED BY THE VICTIMS

12.  The victims were taken to hospital and examined on the same day.

13.  The mother was found to suffer from persistent dizziness.  She was diagnosed with toxic effects of carbon monoxide and poisoning by tranquilizer with acute intoxication.

14.  The 3 daughters were estimated to have carbon monoxide exposure of an estimated 300 minutes in total, with symptoms including dizziness and loss of consciousness.  They were diagnosed with suspected carbon monoxide poisoning, with initial carboxyhaemoglobin levels of 10.1, 10.2, 9.6 and 9.3%, respectively.

15.  According to the medical expert, there are generally no symptoms at carboxyhaemoglobin levels of 0-10% and adverse effects may begin to appear from 15% according to individual response.  There is incoordination, slurred speech, vomiting and progressive impartment of consciousness from 40-50% and death is likely at any level above 50-60%.  Low-level carboxyhaemoglobin saturation would rarely cause permanent bodily damage or prolonged symptoms.

ARREST OF THE DEFENDANT

16.  The defendant was not in Room C501 when the police arrived.  He was located in a guesthouse in Mong Kok at around 6pm on the same day, and arrested for attempted murder.  Under caution, he claimed that he owed debts and was out of options and so he planned to die together with his family.  

17.  A plastic bag containing 0.67g of a mixture containing diazepam and lorazepam were seized.  The plastic bag was labelled “DAYVIGO 5MG” and it was later confirmed to have been prescribed to the defendant by his doctor on 10 November 2021.

VIDEO RECORDED INTERVIEWS

18.  The defendant claimed in his subsequent video recorded interviews that, as a result of his struggling food distribution business, he became heavily indebted after borrowing around $1 million from financial institutions and friends.  When he realized that he was unable to repay his debts, he decided to die with his family so that they will not be harassed by debt collectors.

19.  The defendant was suffering from depression and had been seeking treatment at Castle Peak Hospital since March 2024.  Prior to that, he had also been treated by a private psychiatrist over a period of several months in around 2019 and 2020.  Dr. Cheung would later confirm that the defendant had consulted him between 15 September and 7 December 2021, that he had been diagnosed with moderate depression, and that anti-depressants and sleeping pills (including “DAYVIGO 5MG”) had been prescribed.  The defendant said he had stopped taking his medication due to side effects.  

20.  Upon making the decision to die with his family, he bought some food on 25 June 2024 and made dinner for them.  He crushed about 10 from the 30 sleeping pills previously prescribed by his psychiatrist and put them into the soup base for the noodles.

21.  When the mother returned home at around 6pm, the defendant went downstairs to buy 5 bubble teas, a bag of charcoal and 6 fire starters.  He left the charcoal in the corridor outside the flat and brought the teas home.  He crushed some more sleeping pills and put about 2 tablets’ quantity into each of the teas and kept the rest of the pills in his trousers pocket.

22.  The defendant made dinner and ate with the 4 victims, who drank their teas.  They began feeling dizzy at around 8 to 9 pm, and fell asleep one after another, 2 on their own beds and 2 on the sofa.  

23.  After checking that they were asleep, the defendant taped up the gaps of the main door and the door to the washroom.  He brought the charcoal inside, placed them in several pots and pans, lit the fire starters and placed them around the flat.  

24.  The defendant finished his own bubble tea and went to lie down and slept beside his wife.  He woke up at around 2 to 3 am and decided that he could not bear to see his family die with him.  He took all the charcoal to the kitchen and dozed them with water.  He threw the extinguished charcoal into a rubbish bag and peeled off the tapes from the main door.  

25.  The defendant’s eldest and younger daughter had woken up by then, and they tried to wake their mother and younger sister up.  The defendant did not do anything and got changed and left the flat.  CCTV footages captured him leaving the flat and the building via the rear staircase at around 2:45am.

BACKGROUND AND MITIGATION

26.  The defendant had a clear record.  He was born in Hong Kong in 1981 and is 45.  His father passed away in 2022 from heart failure.  His mother is 80 years old.  The defendant has 3 elder sisters and one elder brother, who suffers from recurrent nasopharyngeal cancer.

27.  As mentioned in the Summary of Facts, the defendant and his ex-wife divorced in 2013 but reconciled in 2024 and had been living together with their 3 daughters, who are now 18, 17 and 15.  Their eldest daughter was born with congenital heart defects and required regular medical follow-up.  Despite her Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and learning disabilities, she is now taking a Foundation Certificate Course in Pet Care at Li Ka Shing School of Professional and Continuing Education of Hong Kong Metropolitan University.  The two younger daughters are in Form 5 and 3 respectively.  

28.  Ms. Wu, counsel for the defendant, tells the court that the defendant worked as a lifeguard, warehouse worker, property management assistant, construction foreman and a bus driver since graduation from secondary school.  At the time of the offences, he was working in the food processing business set up by his eldest sister and brother.  

29.  The defendant has been suffering from bilateral hearing impairment since 2008, cervical spine degeneration since 2020 or 2021, and depression since 2017 or 2018.

30.  Ms. Wu tells of how the defendant’s simple-mindedness and obliging personality had led to him being cheated twice, resulting in bankruptcy in 2004 and 2019, when he was scammed by a friend into investing in fraudulent pyramid schemes, and taking out loans for a construction partnership with his partner who then disappeared with all of the defendant’s savings and loans.  The defendant was still under a bankruptcy order at the time of the offences.

31.  When the defendant was still able to, he would make monthly contributions of $3,000 to his ex-wife and $300 pocket money to his daughters.  He loves his daughters dearly and cares deeply for them.  He would never lose his temper with them and would always try his best to accommodate their requests and buy them their favourite food.  He has a very close and harmonious relationship with his daughters and ex-wife.  

32.  The defendant is also very close to his mother and siblings.  The defendant, at the request of his elder brother who was under treatment for cancer, agreed to take over the struggling family food distribution business in late 2023.  Unfortunately, a buyer defaulted on payments and the defendant had to borrow money from his friends and financial institutions in order to meet the expenses including rental of the factory and wages for workers.  

33.  The tremendous pressure triggered a relapse in his depression and the defendant started to harbour suicidal ideas.  In around March and April 2024, the defendant felt that the business was beyond saving and suggested its closure to his elder brother, who was reluctant and insisted on giving it another try.  Not wanting his brother to be left alone, the defendant obliged and gave up a job offer from a bus company to stay on to help his brother out.  

34.  By the time of the offences, the defendant had not received any salary payments for 9 months and was approximately one million dollars in debt.  Several repayments, which the defendant was not able to make, were due on the actual day of the offences. The defendant sought help from friends, as well as tried to arrange to restructure his debts but was not successful.  Seeing no way out, he formed the idea of killing himself.  

35.  On the morning of his planned suicide, the defendant, his ex-wife, the defendant’s mother and eldest sister all received harassing debt collection messages, threatening harm to his family should he failed to repay the debt.

36.  The defendant was overwhelmed with stress and anxiety, worried that if he had died alone his family would be left to face the threats.  Our of desperation and under the influence of his depression, the defendant made the decision to commit suicide and to kill his ex-wife and daughters after a final meal together.  

37.  As mentioned in the Summary of Facts, the defendant woke up and realized that he could not bear harming his family.  Ms. Wu tells the court that, after the defendant had put out the burning charcoal and peeled off the tape from the main door, everyone had woken up.  His eldest daughter helped to remove the tape from the washroom door before going back to her room to revise for her examination.  The youngest daughter went to play video games while the defendant’s ex-wife and the middle daughter went back to sleep.  

38.  The defendant left home and went to the guesthouse, took all the remaining sleeping pills, intending to commit suicide alone.  He was later located by the police and taken to Tuen Mun and Castle Peak Hospital for treatment.

39.  Ms. Wu points out that her client had never before harmed his ex-wife and daughters; that he had suffered from depression for a number of years and was receiving treatment at the time of the offences.  The threatening calls to his mother and sister triggered his decision to commit suicide with his ex-wife and children.  His judgment was likely to have been impaired by depression.  He drugged the mother and children to ensure they do not suffer pain or discomfort.  Most significantly, he desisted from the killing in time and none of the victims suffered any long term physical injuries or mental harm.  The defendant made full and frank admissions, showing his remorse and willingness to shoulder his responsibilities.  

40.  Ms. Wu concluded her written mitigation by pointing out that this is a sad and tragic case.  The defendant is a gentle person by all accounts and with an unblemished record.  He did not have any history of violence or abusive behaviour.  He is a loving father, caring husband and responsible son and loyal brother.  His ex-wife and daughters had all forgiven him and wrote to seek leniency from the court on his behalf.  Ms. Wu urges this court to exercise compassion and impose a lenient sentence so that the defendant can return to his family as soon as possible and make amends.

THE DEFENDANT’S REPORTS

41.  According to the Medical Report of Dr. Lam of Castle Peak Hospital dated 15 July 2024, the defendant suffered from depressed mood, sense of uselessness and hopelessness, lack of interest and energy with no life goals, fleeting suicidal ideas of jumping from height or burning charcoal, poor sleep, poor appetite and loss of body weight in the past few years.  

42.  When the defendant was first seen by Dr. Lam in February 2024, he appeared settled but his mood was depressed, with the above depressive symptoms.  It was slightly difficult to communicate with the defendant because of his impaired hearing.  The defendant was diagnosed with depression and put on antidepressant and melatonin (for sleep promotion).  

43.  Subsequent regular follow-up treatment showed improved mood but sleep remained poor.  The defendant had never mentioned anything relating to the offences to Dr. Lam.  This Medical Report was prepared upon the request of the police.

44.  The following two Psychiatric Reports were prepared at the request of the learned magistrate on 29 June 2024 for the purpose of committal proceedings.

45.  According to the report prepared by Dr. So, Visiting Psychiatrist at Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre, dated 8 July 2024, it is her opinion that the defendant had suffered from depression, with a differential diagnosis of adjustment disorder.  His mood remained largely stable at Siu Lam, but further observation in a secure environment and psychiatric follow-up is required in view of his history of depressive symptoms and potential suicidal risk.  Dr. So found the defendant mentally fit to plead.

46.  According to the report of Dr. Lam, Visiting Psychiatrist of Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre dated 10 July 2024, he finds that the defendant has a history of depression with the differential diagnosis of adjustment disorder.  The defendant’s mood was settled during his remand in Siu Lam, but Dr. Lam recommended that his mental condition be continuously monitored in a secure setting due to history of fluctuating mood and his recent suicidal attempt.  Further psychiatric follow-up treatment will be arranged to monitor his mental state.  He found the defendant mentally fit to plead.

UPDATED REPORTS

47.  At the request of the defendant’s solicitors, Dr. So of Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre prepared an updated report on the defendant.

48.  Dr. So confirmed that, from June 2024 to June 2025, the defendant had not found to have any pervasive mood disturbances or psychotic symptoms.  He did not require any psychiatric medications and had not been prescribed with any.  The defendant was transferred to Lai Chi Kok Reception Centre in June 2025 with psychiatric follow-up arranged at Siu Lam.  

49.  The defendant’s mental state had remained stable while in remand at Lai Chi Kok and Stanley Prison with no pervasive depressive features.  He last attended a follow-up at Siu Lam via telemedicine on 30 March 2026, when he was noted to be stable and no psychiatric medications were prescribed.  

50.  In her latest mental state examination of the defendant, Dr. So found that the defendant had remained calm during the interview, with coherent and relevant speech.  The defendant was in a stable, calm mental state (euthymic) and his emotional expression matches his current situation or thoughts (congruent affect).  The defendant was not psychotic, and he denied having any active suicidal or violent ideas.

51.  It is Dr. So’s opinion that the defendant’s mental state had stabilized shortly after his admission to Siu Lam in June 2024 and had remained stable with drug-free observation over the past two years.  Compulsory inpatient psychiatric treatment is not warranted at this juncture and out-patient psychiatric follow-up has been arranged for monitoring of his condition.  He remains mentally fit to plead.

52.  Since the reports prepared on the defendant have not included a psychologist’s report, and there is no assessment on the defendant’s risk of re-offending from either the psychiatric or psychological perspective, I ordered a psychologist and a psychiatric report to be prepared on the defendant to specifically address this issue.

53.  In Dr. Jane So’s updated psychiatrist’s report dated 17 July 2026, she gave the following opinion on the defendant’s risk of re-offending:

“While WONG’s mental condition has remained stable during his incarceration, further longitudinal observation and psychiatric follow-up in the community setting are required for monitoring of his condition. Prior to admission, WONG had a history of mood fluctuations and suicidal behaviour when faced with stress in the community. He tended to internalize his stressors and was reluctant to seek help for his problems. In the past two years, WONG’s mood improved and he showed improved understanding and self-reflection of his inadequacies in stress coping and problem solving. However, in view of his past suicidal behaviour at times of intense stress (e.g. the index offence), he is recommended for regular psychiatric follow-up with psychological support to improve his stress coping skills, monitor his functioning in the community and reduce his risk of re-offending.”

54.  In the meticulously prepared report of Clinical Psychologist Ms. Shirley Na dated 13 July 2026, she tells the court how the defendant’s rigid thinking, poor coping skills, chronic over-estimation of his capabilities, inadequate problemsolving skills, weak mood management skills had all contributed to his commission of the present offences:

“Regarding the current offences, Mr. WONG was impressed to have acted under the influence of his weakened judgmental thinking, which was driven by profound despair rather than malice or an intent to harm his family. Given his rigid thinking style, he wrongly perceived death as the only viable resolution to his financial crisis. He also showed a marked inability to consider the potential harm his actions would inflict upon his wife and daughters. While it was fortunate that no physical injuries occurred, his recklessness and weak judgement remained a serious clinical concern. At present, his risk of re-offending a violent crime was assessed as Low. However, should his depressive mood persist, and his coping skills remain limited, he remains at risk for suicide, which could possibly induce harm to his significant others unintentionally. …

To support his relapse prevention and maximize his treatment gain, psychological intervention focusing on his mood management, adaptive coping skills, and realistic problem-solving strategies, alongside his current psychiatric treatment, is strongly recommended.”

VICTIM IMPACT REPORTS

55.  Although I have the medical reports of each of the victims, they were prepared near the time of the incident and do not provide any insight into their psychological situation. As such, I ordered victim impact reports to be prepared on all 4 victims.

THE MOTHER

56.  Clinical Psychologist Dr. Wong finds that while Ms. Leung suffered considerable emotional distress at first, she has since made a gradual recovery and been able to maintain normal daily functioning.  The low psychological impact she has exhibited may be due to her understanding that her husband had done what he did out of desperation and not malice.  She has full belief in the sincerity of his remorse.  The emotional impact on her stemmed not from the attempt to die with his family, but from her husband’s reluctance or inability to communicate with her about his financial decisions and difficulties.  She finds that Ms. Leung is hopeful towards the defendant’s rehabilitation and reintegration into the family, and Dr. Wong supports her view that she does not need further psychotherapy sessions, and can rely on the family social worker should future need for support arises.

THE DAUGHTERS

57.  All 3 daughters have shown remarkable resilience and there are no lasting psychological damage. They each has forgiven the defendant and wishes for him to come home to them.

SENTENCING CONSIDERATIONS

58.  The maximum sentence on conviction upon indictment for the offence of attempted murder is that of life imprisonment[2].

59.  There are no sentencing guidelines as each case is extremely facts sensitive.

60.  The prosecution refers to the case of HKSAR v Cheung Chu-kong [2019] HKCA 998 to assist this court in sentencing.  

61.  There the applicant pleaded guilty to 3 counts of attempted murder and was sentenced to a total term of 8 years’ imprisonment.  The facts were not dissimilar to the present case.  The 3 victims were the defendant’s children, aged 6, 4 and 2.  The applicant bought two bags of charcoal at the supermarket and arranged for the 4 of them to sleep together in his bedroom.  

62.  The two year old was heard by their domestic helper to be crying in the early hours and she went into the applicant’s bedroom and brought the child back to her own room and to continue sleeping.  

63.  Later on at about 5:10 am, after receiving a call telling her that the applicant was absent from work, the applicant’s wife (who was living outside during that time) went to the flat to find out what had happened.  Upon entering, she smelt burning and saw smoke coming out of the applicant’s bedroom.  She went in and opened all the windows to ventilate the flat.  The 6 year old had wet trousers, while the 4 year old had saliva and white foam coming out of his mouth.  She also saw a bucket of burning charcoal in the room.

64.  The matter was reported to the police and the applicant arrested.  He said under caution that he had consumed alcohol and sleeping pills and was trying to die with his children.  He claimed in his video recorded interview that he was in debt and wanted to commit suicide.  He bought the charcoal and had initially stored them in the back staircase.  He wanted to die with his children because he worried no one would take care of them after if he died.  He used a gas torch to ignite the charcoal.  He did not give the children any medication.

65.  The applicant was 37 at the time of sentence.  He had incurred debts from his logistics business in 2016.  That was also the year his marriage broke down and his wife left their home.  

66.  The applicant had taken alcohol, Zopiclone and marijuana before his commission of the offences.  Apart from being diagnosed with alcohol dependence syndrome causing mental and behavioral disorder, the applicant did not suffer other psychiatric illnesses.  

67.  A clinical psychologist interviewed the applicant, and was concerned at the risk of recidivism unless his alcohol usage was controlled.  

68.  A psychological report as also prepared on the eldest child.  She did not suffer any post-traumatic stress reaction, or other psychological disturbances that warranted clinical attention.  She did not fear for her own safety, and was missing her father, the applicant.  The mother of the children confirmed that they were missing their father.  She did not want them to grow up without their father and asked for leniency on his behalf.  

69.  In considering the question of whether it is reasonably arguable that the sentence of 8 years’ imprisonment was open to appeal, Macrae VP identified two particularly significant circumstances.  First was that the crime was clearly planned, that “the applicant set in motion a long drawn-out and determined process from which…he at no time ever sought to draw back.  Indeed, he effectively and voluntarily incapacitated himself with drink and drugs.”[3]

70.  The second circumstance is that the victims were “no less than three very young, vulnerable and entirely innocent children, for whom the applicant was in a position of unquestioning trust, authority and responsibility”[4].

71.  Macrae VP confirmed the two important principles underlying the sentencing of cases of this nature as identified by the learned trial judge:

“31. The judge identified two important principles underlying the sentencing of cases of this nature: the first is to mark society’s abhorrence of such crimes; the second is to deter others who might be minded to do the same thing. The repugnance which the public would feel for offences of this nature and the need to deter others from doing the same thing, in circumstances where the perpetrators would not expect themselves to have to face any consequences if they succeeded, must inevitably trump the forgiveness of the victims and the consequent loss (for some time) of their father.”

72.  Applying those principles to the facts of that case, Macrae VP found as follows and refused the application:

“33. …an appellate court must look…at whether the overall sentence of 8 years’ imprisonment upon pleas of guilty to three counts of attempted murder of entirely blameless young children, in the circumstances put before the court, was manifestly excessive and/or wrong in principle. The sentence in this case may be severe, but the culpability involved in an offence of attempted murder, in which the offender’s intention is to kill innocent children, is necessarily of a high level. Despite the very full and impassioned submissions of Mr. Grounds on the applicant’s behalf, I do not consider that there are reasonable grounds of appeal against sentence in this case.”

73.  In the present case, Ms. Wu in her submissions for mitigation pointed out that the defendant’s culpability is considerably lower than the applicant in that case.  There the applicant had brought about his mental state by voluntary consumption of alcohol and drugs.  The applicant did not suffer from other psychiatric illnesses.  There was no immediate triggering event to the attempted killing of his children.  Reports suggested that he had a reckless personality and there was a real risk of re-offending.  The three children were of very tender age.  Most importantly, the applicant did not shrink from what he had intended to do, had the wife not received the phone call from the applicant’s business partner, she would not have visited the flat and the children would most likely have been killed.  

74.  I agree with Ms. Wu.

75.  Although the attempts were premeditated and all 4 victims were drugged, the key factor that differentiates the defendant from the applicant in Cheung Chu-kong is his decision to stop.

76.  Furthermore, there was an immediate triggering event by way of the threatening calls to the defendant and his family members that took place very near the time of his decision to bring along his family on his suicide.

77.  The defendant was likely suffering from depression at around the time of the offence.  There was no ill intent or malice in his commission of the offences, merely desperation and very bad judgment.

78.  Based on all the reports, it is clear that the defendant, up to the point of the attempts, had been a responsible husband and loving father who has been trying for most of his life to provide for his family.  He is also a dutiful sibling who simply took on too much.  

79.  The fact that the victims have not suffered long term physical or psychological damage is another important factor to consider.

80.  This is, as Ms. Wu submits, a tragic case.  It is most fortunate that no one lost their lives and it is not too late for the defendant to accept that he needs help and to make amends.  Now that the family is aware of the problems that the defendant was trying to deal with all by himself, he is no longer alone and should be able to better negotiate a way out of the situation together.

81.  Having identified all the mitigating factors, one must not forget the horrific nature of what the defendant had set out to do, the breach of the trust his children and ex-wife in his act, and the need for the sentence to have the necessary deterrent effect.

82.  Taking all circumstances into consideration, I find that a combined starting point of 8 years’ imprisonment is sufficient to reflect the severity of the case, while balancing that with the unfortunate personal circumstances behind the defendant’s commission of the offences.  

FINAL SENTENCE

83.  I, therefore, sentence the defendant to 5 years 4 months’ imprisonment after plea on each of the 4 counts, and order them to be served wholly concurrently.  

84.  I find that this sentence, given the specific circumstances of this case, is sufficient to reflect the defendant’s culpability and to deter.