|
DCCC798/2011
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 798 OF 2011
----------------------
----------------------
| Date:
|
17 November 2011 at 9.58 am
|
| Present:
|
Mr Lenny Cheng, PP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
|
|
|
Mr Lee Kwok-chuen, Victor, instructed by Damien Shea & Co., assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Defendant
|
---------------------
Reasons for Sentence
---------------------
1. The defendant has pleaded guilty to a charge of wounding. The offence occurred on 1 June 2011 at a park outside Lok King House on the Lai King Estate in Kwai Chung in the New Territories.
2. The victim in this case, Mr Wong, is 67 years of age. At about 5 to 7 on the morning of 1 June 2011, he was doing his morning exercise at a park near to China Holiness College outside the Lai King Estate. The defendant was smoking in the vicinity of where the victim was exercising and the victim rebuked him for doing so. There was a heated dispute and the defendant left.
3. However, he returned shortly afterwards with a large beef knife and brandished it towards the victim. In order to subdue the defendant, the victim immediately took hold of the defendant’s left hand, as a result of which they both fell to the ground. During the struggle the victim’s left palm was cut.
4. The incident was witnessed by somebody who was also in the area for exercise, a Mr Mo, who is 73 years of age. He came to the assistance of the victim and took hold of the knife and put it on the ground away from the defendant. The defendant then picked up the knife and fled from the scene.
5. The witness, Mr Mo, reported the case to the police using his mobile phone and followed the defendant to a male toilet, where the defendant washed his undershirt, which he later discarded in a rubbish bin. He then saw the defendant fleeing towards the On King Estate.
6. Shortly afterwards, the police arrived and Mr Mo told the police what had happened and toured around the vicinity with the police officers, and they saw the defendant near to the Vocational Training Council.
7. The defendant was arrested and under caution admitted having brought the knife from his home in order to chop the victim as the victim had rebuked him for smoking.
8. The officers searched the area and the beef knife used in the attack was found at a slope underneath the park whilst the undershirt the defendant had been wearing was recovered from a rubbish bin.
9. The victim was admitted to Princess Margaret Hospital where he stayed for 8 days from 1 to 8 of June. Medical findings indicate that the victim’s left index finger flexor tendons, lumbricals as well as radial neurovascular bundle were completely cut. I have been told however that this is a non-permanent injury.
10. The defendant has got one previous matter, a dissimilar matter, several years ago, for which he was fined.
11. On the previous occasion, I adjourned the case for a psychiatric report. The report indicates that the defendant was born on the Mainland and came to Hong Kong in 1970. He was the second child of a family of five and there was no mental history in the family.
12. Although his identity card shows his age to be 63, the defendant says his actual age is 69. He pursued studies up to Primary 6 and worked as a cook for nearly 30 years before his retirement 10 years ago. He is married with a son and daughter in their 20s. I am told that he smokes a packet of cigarettes a day but does not use alcohol or any illicit substances.
13. The psychiatric history discloses that the defendant first saw a psychiatrist 2 or 3 years ago at the West Kowloon Psychiatric Centre. He was suffering from anxiety, he slept poorly and was preoccupied with somatic symptoms such as headache and dizziness. He frequently became irritable and tried to punch his chest after becoming annoyed, but there was no actual violence. I was told that since he has been arrested for this offence his anxiety has increased, and in July 2011 attempted to jump from the 12th floor but was stopped by his wife.
14. I understand that in addition to those matters, his memory seems to have deteriorated in recent years. He has become forgetful and lost his keys repeatedly. He also forgets to turn off the stove. At the West Kowloon Psychiatric Centre he was diagnosed as suffering from dementia. An anti-depressant has been prescribed for his emotional wellbeing and investigations for the memory impairment have been arranged.
15. As regards the offence, the defendant told the psychiatrist that there was a brawl with the victim after the victim demanded that he extinguish his cigarette. The victim punched his face, he became agitated and went back home to retrieve a fruit knife. He denied intending to hurt the victim. He said the victim was injured when he tried to grab the knife.
16. The defendant is diagnosed as suffering from mild cognitive impairment. He has no active psychiatric problems, but it is possible that he has had a history of anxiety disorder as well. In hospital treatment is not recommended.
17. I have considered very carefully the circumstances of this offence and the mitigation that has been put forward. Clearly the defendant is suffering from some depressive disorder. However, the offence itself was not committed on the spur of the moment. The defendant returned to his home to get the knife in order to deal with the victim. After the incident, the defendant washed his undershirt and discarded it in a rubbish bin. He also discarded the knife. They show a degree of premeditation and thought for concealment of the offence after it was committed.
18. As against that, we have a man who is nearly 70. He has no previous convictions, let alone convictions for anything of violence in his past. Fortuitously, the injuries sustained by the victim, although he was in hospital for over a week, are such that they will be non-permanent. Compensation has been told to the victim. I have letters of support from the defendant’s family placed before the court.
19. The use of the knife dictates that a sentence of imprisonment has to be imposed. However, I propose to take a starting point, given all the mitigating features of this case, of 6 months’ imprisonment and reduce it to 4 months to reflect the guilty plea.
|