HKSAR v. CHAN YAT FU

DCCC314/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 314 OF 2009

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to an offence of wounding contrary to section 19 of the Offences against the Person Ordinance Cap.212.

2.  You have admitted that on 15 February 2009 inside the flat on the 9th Floor of Tak Po Building at 2-24 Tai Pei Square, Tsuen Wan you unlawfully and maliciously wounded Chan Wing-kin. On that material day at about 1.30 am you went to the flat where you saw your former girlfriend. You rang the doorbell and your former girlfriend answered the door and you told her that you wanted to get back your personal belongings, so she let you back into the flat.

3.  When you entered the flat you saw a man naked in the bedroom. You then went to the kitchen and took a chopper and, armed with this chopper, attacked this man who is the victim of this charge. The victim suffered a deep chop wound of about 8 centimetres over his left forearm as well as superficial cut wounds over his anterior chest wall, face and left leg. He was discharged from the hospital the next day. You then surrendered yourself to the police on 16 February 2009 and you were arrested for wounding.

4.  On the last occasion your counsel, Mr Victor Ho, made full and detailed mitigation on your behalf. I adjourned sentence upon you until today and I called for a background report, a Community Service Order report and a psychological Report. I am informed that you agree to the contents and accept the contents of all those reports.

5.  I have taken into account all that Mr Ho has said on your behalf and his mitigation in asking this court particularly in not imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon you but asking this court to sentence you to a Community Service Order.

6.  You are 32 years of age and of clear record. I accept having read the contents of the reports and all the mitigating letters written on your behalf by family members and friends that this offence was committed completely out of character.

7.  You have been gainfully employed. You have been working for your father’s company for 8 to 9 years, are a career-minded person, conscientious and hard-working. You also appear to have no relationship problems with your other co-workers. As can be seen from the psychological report, your former girlfriend says that you are not of a violent character. The psychologist says that you are a normal person with no abnormal behaviour, and given your clear criminal background and structured living your risk of re-offending in a similar nature is relatively low.

8.  She does say, however, that you could improve your intimacy skills, frustration, tolerance and violence-related beliefs and interpersonal conflict resolution. It is, of course, of greatest concern to me that although you admit and, as stated in the Community Service Order report that you committed this offence impulsively, you lost control of your emotions and temper without consequential thinking, that you should resort to such a serious, severe life-endangering gesture and act as to get a chopper and chop an innocent victim.

9.  At that time you had broken up with this girl for a few months already. Admittedly, you thought you were in a cooling-off period and you had resided with her for a couple of years but your relationship was effectively over for a few months already. There was some disruption to your relationship in late 2008 when your former girlfriend declined to marry you and had an abortion. She initiated the break-up and you moved out of the flat. You returned to the flat, you tell me in mitigation, for the purposes of rekindling your relationship late evening at the end of Valentine’s Day. You lost control of yourself when she let you into the flat and saw a man naked in her bedroom.

10.  Although Mr Ho has urged this court for a Community Service Order report, as I said on the last occasion I do consider this to be of such a serious nature that this does warrant an immediate custodial sentence. The act of losing your temper or control and taking a chopper to chop somebody cannot be seen to be tolerated and must be shown that if you do commit such an act you are going to receive a deterrent sentence. The probation officer also considered that this was a marginal case for community service as a result of the seriousness of this offence. No matter how angry or frustrated you are, one cannot pick up any weapon whatsoever let alone a lethal life-threatening weapon such as a chopper which can cause severe and nameless injuries. They cause horrendous injuries. In this case the victim had suffered an 8 centimetre deep laceration over his left forearm. He also received some superficial cut wounds over his chest wall, face and left leg. It was perhaps fortunate that no further more serious injuries were caused.

11.  I accept that immediately after the attack you took care of his injuries. Obviously you were very remorseful for what you had done. Although you left the flat before the police arrived you surrendered yourself to the police the following day. These are very strong mitigating factors on your behalf. Obviously your plea of guilty is also a very large mitigating factor showing your clear remorse to the court and that you are deeply sorry for what you have done. You have also expressed openly in court that you asked your ex-girlfriend and the victim to accept your apology for your very serious act upon them.

12.  I consider in this case a starting point of 15 months’ imprisonment given all those factors. Giving you full credit for your plea of guilty I reduce that term to one of 10 months’ imprisonment to which you are so sentenced.