HKSAR v. WU CHI WAI

DCCC 1018/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 1018 OF 2012

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  The defendant has pleaded guilty to a charge of wounding, contrary to section 19 of the Offences Against the Person Ordinance.

2.  The Summary of Facts states that the victim in this case lent money to the defendant in June of 2012.  The defendant failed to pay back the money.  At about 5 to 8 on the evening of 24 July, the victim and a friend of his went to a game centre called the Venus Games Centre in Tin Shui Wai, Yuen Long to look for the defendant.  The victim entered the game centre to locate the defendant.  The defendant was accompanied by two men.  The victim asked the defendant to go outside to have a talk.

3.  When the victim, his friend, the defendant and the two unknown males were outside the game centre, the victim kept demanding that the defendant settle the outstanding debt.  Suddenly, the defendant took out a knife about 18 inches in length and slashed the victim three times. Fortunately, the victim managed to block the attacks with his arms and fled the scene. 

4.  Medical findings disclose that the victim had lacerations on his right elbow and left hand.  These wounds required nine stitches.

5.  On the evening of 14 August, the victim met the defendant at Tin Yiu Estate and immediately contacted the police who soon arrived at the scene and arrested the defendant.  The defendant remained silent under caution.

6.  The defendant has appeared before the court on 12 previous occasions in respect of 14 offences.  Five of those offences were offences involving some form of assault and four of them were for criminal intimidation.  The defendant has been imprisoned previously for these offences.  I note that in 2009 he was imprisoned for 8 months for common assault and criminal intimidation, and he was most recently discharged from prison about six months before the commission of the offence.

7.  The defendant is 22 years of age.  He was educated to Form 3 standard and worked previously as a transportation worker. His father died in 2002 and because of his relationship with his mother, he has lived with an uncle since then.  I note the defendant was 21 at the time the offence was committed.  He is an only child of the family.  Medical evidence has been adduced in respect of his mother to show that she has been suffering from heart problems and she has attended court today to support her son.

8.  I am told that the offence was a dispute over money.  The victim had lent the defendant a total of $2,000 in two lots in June 2012, and it was understood that he was to repay that money together with an additional $1,500 in mid-August.  As such, that would constitute an interest of 450 per cent, making the loan unenforceable and the victim guilty of an offence of lending at an excessive rate.  The defendant was unable to repay the loan and he committed the offence when he was being pressed for repayment.

9.  Medical reports on the victim show that the victim was taken to hospital and treated for a wound measuring some 4 to 5 centimetres on his left hand between his thumb and index finger, and he was unable to flex his thumb.  The wound to the right elbow measured some 5 centimetres and it was deep into the muscle tissue, and the victim was referred to an orthopaedic surgeon who dealt with the two wounds, and the injuries were repaired in the subsequent operation and the victim spent only one night in hospital.  The victim was referred to return to the hospital for physiotherapy treatment as he was suffering from numbness and stiffness in the thumb as of September 2012.

10.  A letter has been produced from the defendant in which he apologises for the offences and asks for a chance.  He said that he is disappointed with himself and also concerned about the anxiety he has caused to his mother.  He accepts full responsibility for the offence and vows to change in the future.

11.  As counsel has rightly stated, there is no tariff for offences of this nature.  Every case will depend on its own particular facts, and the defendant will be entitled to a discount of one-third for entering his guilty plea at an early stage.

12.  However, as offences of this kind go, in my view, this is at the more serious end of the spectrum.  On the evening of the offence, the defendant was carrying with him a knife which was some 18 inches in length, and the situation outside the video game centre showed that the victim was there with another man and the defendant was there with two other men, and yet even in that situation he found it necessary to produce the knife and cause the injuries which the victim sustained.  It is entirely fortuitous that the injuries were not more serious.  Given his record for violence, the defendant cannot expect the leniency of this court, especially having been released from prison only six months before the commission of the offence.  In my view, he was extremely fortunate that the less serious offence of wounding contrary section 19 of the Ordinance was accepted by the prosecution.

13.  In respect of this offence, I take a starting point of 18 months’ imprisonment and reduce that by one-third to reflect your guilty plea.  The defendant will go to prison for 12 months for this offence.