HKSAR v. LI PING KWAN

DCCC 692/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 692 OF 2012

____________

_______________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

_______________________

The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "Wounding with intent". The defendant took part in a gang attack against the victim.

Summary of Facts

2.  About 9:40 pm on 11 May 2012, after having dinner with his friends in a restaurant, Mr. WONG (PW1) walked past Nos.155-181 Castle Peak Road, Shamshuipo together with 2 of his friends to fetch his car.  When they were about 2 to 3 meters away from PW1's car, 4 masked assailants alighted from an unidentified silver private car, which stopped in the middle carriageway of Castle Peak Road (Mongkok direction), and dashed forward to attack PW1 with knives.

3.  A traffic police officer (PW2) was on motorcycle patrol at the scene.  He drew his service pistol and warned the assailants to stop the attack or he would shoot.  The assailants fled, except one who turned to attack PW2 with a machete.  PW2 fired once and shot that assailant.  The other assailants managed to get into the silver private car and escaped.

4.  The shot assailant was certified dead shortly after admission to the hospital.  He was identified to be KWOK Wing-kei (aged 36) who had convictions of triad offences.

5.  The Police found a shoulder bag at the scene which contained the defendant's personal belongings including his Hong Kong Identity Card, driver's licence and China Re-entry Permit.

6.  About 7:00 am on 22 May 2012, the Police found and arrested the defendant in an industrial building situated at Tai Yau Street, San Po Kong.  Under caution, the defendant said "It has nothing to do with my big brother.  'Fei Kai' (PW1) was chopped by me because he was cheeky."  In his video recorded interview, the defendant admitted that he took part in chopping "Fei Kai" and it had nothing to do with others. The shoulder bag found at the scene and the identity documents contained therein all belonged to him.

7.  As a result of the attack, PW1 sustained multiple chop wounds on both hands, both knees and right ankle.[1]  He received surgery the day after the attack.  He remained in the hospital for almost a month and was discharged on 6 June 2012.  He was last seen by a doctor on 29 June 2012 and his wounds were found to have healed.  He has no permanent injuries.

Mitigation and Sentence

8.  The defendant is now 29.  He has 5 conviction records with no violence-related offences.  He is single and was unemployed at the time of the present offence.

9.  Defence counsel Mr. WOON informed me that the defendant once worked as a second-hand car dealer earning about $13,000 per month.  He quitted that job when his company moved from Kwun Tong to Fanling. 

10.  Mr. WOON submitted that the defendant met the deceased assailant in prison.  He foolishly followed the deceased's instruction to attack the victim.  The defendant has now cut off all links with those undesirable characters.  Mr. WOON stressed that notwithstanding the lack of direct identification evidence against the defendant, he has made full and frank admission upon arrest, which shows his remorse and willingness to shoulder his responsibilities.

11.  Mr. WOON also submitted that the victim sustained injuries only on his hands, knees and right ankle; the vital parts of his body such as face, head and chest were not hurt.  The purpose of the attack was to teach PW1 a minor lesson; the defendant had refrained from attacking any vulnerable parts of his body.  In fact, PW1 sustained no fatal wounds or permanent injuries.

12.  Letters written by the defendant and his former employer were placed before me; their contents are duly noted.  With Mr. WOON's consent, I had sight of some photographs depicting PW1's injuries and a machete recovered at the scene.

13.  The law is plain that no one is allowed to take the law into his own hands to seek revenge against another person.  What the defendant, the deceased and the escaped assailants did was brutal, uncivilized and an affront to the public conscience.  It was clearly a pre-meditated savage attack on PW1 coupled with a semi-successful escape plan.  Although not fatal, PW1 sustained serious physical injuries, needless to say the pain and suffering as well as the agony arising from this traumatic experience.

14.  It is most fortunate that PW1 has recovered fully and sustained no permanent injuries.  However, I reject Mr. WOON's submission that it was due to the defendant's refraining from attacking the vulnerable parts of PW1's body.  In my view, it was purely PW1's luck.  Even just aiming at PW1's hands, knees and ankles, which I have no doubt cannot be done with the slightest degree of precision, a gang attack of this type involving at least 1 military machete is likely to be fatal.  If nothing else, the chopping might well sever an artery of the victim, thereby causing him severe bleeding and death.  Serious injuries and even fatality must have been foreseeable by the assailants including the defendant. 

15.  I am aware that sentencing of wounding offences is case specific and there is no tariff as such; however, sentences in the range of 3 to 12 years' imprisonment are by no means uncommon.  Having considered all aspects of this case, I take the view that a starting point of 5.5 years' imprisonment is appropriate.  A one-third discount is given for the guilty plea, reducing the sentence to 44 months.  Apart from this, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further discount.  The sentence I pass is therefore 44 months.