|
DCCC1065/2009
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1065 OF 2009
----------------------
| |
HKSAR |
|
| |
v. |
|
| |
Poon Yin-kin (D1) |
|
| |
Cheung Hoi-tung (D2) |
|
----------------------
|
Before:
|
H H Judge Tallentire
|
|
Date:
|
4 February 2010 at 10.52 am
|
|
Present:
|
Mr Bobby Cheung Man-kwan, PP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Mr Bok Tin-yuen, instructed by Messrs Cheung & Yip, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the 1st Defendant
Mr Geoffrey Chang, instructed by Messrs S T Poon & Wong, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the 2nd Defendant
|
|
Offence:
|
(1) & (2) Wounding with intent(有意圖而傷人)
|
---------------------------
Reasons for Sentence
---------------------------
1. Defendants, each of you pleaded guilty to two joint offences of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, contrary to section 17(a) of the Offences against the Person Ordinance, Cap.212.
2. You each admitted the Brief Facts and I convicted you. Those facts were as follows.
3. At 6.30 pm on 16 June last, Tsang Tsz-mei, aged 13, who was PW1, had a conflict with a boy called Wong Pak-shing at Yat Tung Estate, Tung Chung, Lantau. Later at about 8.30 pm whilst PW1 was chatting with a friend Lam Hoi-fung, who was aged 15, PW2, and Chen Jiayuan, 14, PW3, at the sitting-out area outside No.26 Sheung Ling Pei, Tung Chung, four males alighted from an LGV and rushed towards them. One male was concealing his left hand and the other his right hand behind their backs.
4. PW1 and PW2 recognized you, D2; they knew you. You, D2, and the other male who was you, D1, each produced a knife about 18 inches in length. D2, you chopped PW1’s elbow and left little finger. And D1, you chopped his left knee. PW1 fell to the ground bleeding heavily. D2, you then attempted to chop PW2’s foot but PW2 managed to avoid that. However, you, D2, renewed your attack and chopped his left ankle, which is Charge 2. PW3 fortunately was not attacked. Both of you and the other two males boarded the LGV and fled. Police had already been called.
5. The other two males were unarmed and did not attack either of the prosecution witnesses. Both victims were taken to Princess Margaret Hospital.
6. The first victim PW1 sustaining the following injuries: a 2-cm wound to his left little finger, the central slip and ulnar side of the extensor tendon was cut, the promixal interphalangeal joint was exposed; a 4-cm chop wound to the right elbow, part of the muscle was torn and a nerve cut; a 3-cm transverse chop wound over the left knee. An emergency operation was performed and PW1 was kept in hospital for three days.
7. PW2 sustained the following injuries: a 8-cm transverse cut wound over the left ankle; the Achilles tendon was exposed and torn; the Tendo Achilles was cut by 90 per cent; the sural nerve was completely cut; the left distal fibula was fractured. The second victim, PW2, also had to have an emergency operation and was kept in hospital for some seven days.
8. Each of you were identified at an identification parade held on 8 July of last year. Upon arrest, each of you denied the offence.
9. Turning now to your record. D1, you admitted to 23 previous convictions, 14 of which involved violence; D2 to one previous conviction which was dissimilar.
10. I adjourned sentence for reports. In your case, D1, for a probation officer’s background report and a psychological report. I was advised by your counsel which is quite true that you do not suffer from any psychiatric problems. I note also that psychological intervention was not deemed to be necessary at this stage.
11. In respect of you, D2, you are 17 years of age. I adjourned for a probation officer’s background report and a report as to your suitability for training centre.
12. Those reports are now before me and accepted by both of you.
13. Mr Bok on behalf of you, D1, entered mitigation. He told me you are 31 years of age, co-habiting with the mother of your daughter. From the reports it is clear that this is a stable relationship and the present incarceration is causing much distress to all parties. Mr Bok produced three letters, one from yourself, one from your common law wife and one from your mother. I have considered the contents of those letters and taken them into account.
14. Mr Bok expressed your deep remorse and in fact you yourself expressed deep remorse. He also stressed that both victims had largely recovered from their injuries. He asked me to make each sentence concurrent to each other. As there are two charges, but it is essentially one incident. He also asked me to consider making any sentence of imprisonment to concurrent with your existing sentence, that being a sentence of 12 months’ imprisonment imposed in October of last year, a sentence of 12 months for an offence of possession of dangerous drugs.
15. Mr Chang on behalf of you, D2, also entered mitigation. He told me you are 17 years of age and presently serving a sentence of rehabilitation centre. That sentence was imposed on your breach of a probation order. Mr Chang, and this is borne out by the report from the Commissioner of Correctional Services, says that at the rehabilitation centre you have managed to behave yourself, comply with the regulations and show signs of maturing. He produced a letter written by you from remand. In that letter you expressed your remorse and perhaps a realization that you cannot continue in this way.
16. In relation to these offences, Mr Chang acknowledged their serious nature but rightly refers to the fact that though knives were used, the target was the limbs rather than the vital organs. Though he very realistically acknowledges the danger of a permanent injury and disability but refers to the fact that both of the victims appear to have recovered.
17. You are the product of a broken home. You had educational and behavioural problems in the past. On your behalf, Mr Chang has given your age and record urged me to accept the recommendation of a training centre.
18. I turn now to the sentence. This was a serious attack in which knives were used and injuries inflicted on the victims. That they have both substantially recovered, is fortunate. It was a revenge attack, cowardly and vile. The victims were young, no more than boys. They were unarmed and they were outnumbered. Whilst only you two took part in the actual attack, two others were present to intimidate.
19. D1, you have an appalling record of criminal offences and an appalling record of offences of violence. D2, you are but 17 years of age, you have no previous convictions of violence and a light record. However, against that I have to acknowledge that you, D2, seem to have caused the worst of the injuries in that you had perpetrated the second attack.
20. I note that both of you faced up to your responsibilities by your pleas of guilty. I note also that you both express deep remorse. I note in your case, D1, that your family has been adversely affected by your incarceration but that is entirely your own fault brought about by the offences you have committed. You D1, you are a mature adult, 30 years of age and, I reiterate, a man with a history of violence. It is to be hoped that this now is the end of the matter, and you can for the sake of yourself and your family turn over a new leaf.
21. D2, you are young; you are 17 years of age. You have a light record with no history of violence. This, in my opinion, does place you in a different category from D1.
22. D1, I think you are realistical enough to realize that only a substantial and immediate prison sentence is appropriate for this type of offence. Given your age, the circumstances and your record, in your case, I take as a starting point of 3½ years, that is 42 months’ imprisonment on each offence, reduced to 2 years and 4 months for your plea of guilty, that is 28 months. This will be served concurrently to each other as I recognize this is one set of circumstances. However, I can see absolutely no reason why they should be concurrent to your existing sentence, that was a totally different matter involving drugs. Therefore, that 28 months would be consecutive to your existing sentence.
23. D2, I have thought long and hard about your situation. I acknowledge, as I have said, your age and light record. The reports do see some hope for you. It could be that with correct guidance that you will turn out to be a decent and useful adult and member of society. Training centre is a serious punishment, but it has elements of rehabilitation. Therefore, given all the circumstances, you will go to training centre on each charge.
| |
Tallentire
District Judge |
|