HKSAR v. SUN KAI

DCCC 1038/2017

[2018] HKDC 519

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 1038 OF 2017

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

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

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

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

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

Background

1.  The defendant is represented by counsel and he pleads guilty to two charges of intentional wounding in front of me.

Facts

2.  The defendant was a newlywed.  He was happy about the marriage and he was celebrating it over a few days.  This case took place one evening at a local restaurant near the Shum Shui Po area when the defendant was having a night out with his friends and his wife for the said celebration.  Despite the otherwise delightful nature of this vinous occasion, there was tiny dispute with a stranger, which ended in blood.

3.  Simply put, the defendant had a collision with Stranger 1 in the toilet of the restaurant.  Arguments ensued.  Friends came to mediate.  Matter apparently settled but minutes later, the defendant came back with a 25 cm knife, which the defendant used to cut Stranger 1 three times, one time on thumb, one time on forearm and one time on chest near the neck.

4.  The defendant fled the scene.  Other strangers were chasing.  The defendant turned back intending to hurt the chasing strangers.  Stranger 2 managed to avoid but Stranger 3 suffered from similar cuts, one on abdomen and one on neck.

5.  The defendant was exhausted and he was suppressed awaiting Police arrival.

6.  The length of the wounds on the two victims varied from 1 to 10 cm and most of them required stitches in the hospital.  The medical reports submitted to this court do not show any residual pain or damage now.

7.  The defendant was subsequently sent for hospital examination, where doctors confirmed that he suffered no psychiatric disorder.

Mitigation

8.  The defendant is 27 years old.  He has no criminal record in Hong Kong.  He is a resident in mainland China.  He used to be working as a security guard earning about 3000 RMB a month.  He has a 7-year-old daughter from his first marriage.  The counsel says that the defendant is truly remorseful now and askes this court to be as lenient as possible to the defendant and hopefully that the sentences of the 2 charges would run concurrently.

Consideration and sentence

9.  Despite the too variable factual matrix of each wounding case, the Court of Appeal has very broadly remarked that this kind of charge would usually result in an imprisonment term of 3 to 12 years, Yuen Wai-kui CACC 280/2004.

10.  This case was a retaliated and to some extent thought-about attack.  Could-be lethal weapon was brought to the scene.  Chasers were attacked.  These are aggravated factors in the consideration of the sentence.  But, the case was a one-man operation, the wounds on the victims were not many in numbers and apparently they were not too deep, with no permanent damage, I reckon this case at the bottom end of the scale and I accordingly adopt 3 years’ imprisonment on each charge as a starting point.

11.  The defendant indicated guilty plea at the earliest opportunity and according to the law he should be given the full one third discount on the sentence.  He is therefore sent to prison on each charge for 2 years.  Having considered the Totality Principle, I order that 3 months out of Charge Two is to run consecutive to the sentence of Charge One, because the Two was successive to One, they do not cover the same victim, not exactly the same place nor time.

12.  Today, the defendant is sentenced to 27 months imprisonment in total.