HKSAR v. CHAN HO YIN

DCCC 581/2016

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 581 OF 2016

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  The defendant has pleaded guilty to one charge of wounding with intent, contrary to section 17(a) of the Offences against the Person Ordinance, Cap 212.

2.  The facts are as follows.  The defendant and the victim of this offence, another young man, have been friends for about seven years.  The defendant met a girl and dated her between April and May this year.  The victim started to date the same girl in May this year.  This whole incident arose out of a dispute over this girl.  The defendant was upset that the victim had stolen his girlfriend.

3.  To add insult to injury, the victim apparently teased him in Facebook posts.  Apparently, this was seen by other people, and some of those people and the defendant then attacked the victim in a bar in Yuen Long at about 4.30 am on 22/5/2016.  At the material time, the victim and the girl had been there for several hours.  At about 4.30 in the morning, the defendant rushed into this bar with six other males.  Two of the men were carrying beef knives.  They approached the victim and scolded and swore at him.  The defendant threw punches at the victim, causing him to fall to the ground.  On the ground, he was then kicked, punched and chopped with the beef knives for about 40 seconds.

4.  The defendant is filmed on CCTV camera attacking the victim, whilst he was on the ground, with a metal folding chair.  The victim instinctively put up his arms to protect his head, resulting in both forearms being chopped, with lacerations of 6 centimetres and 8 centimetres.  There was also a 10‑centimetre laceration to his right leg.  When admitted into hospital, the victim could not extend his fingers because of the multiple tendon injuries to both arms.  He suffered very serious injuries.  He had emergency surgery and repair that same morning.  This was followed by physiotherapy and occupational therapy.  I am told some six months later, he can now move his fingers.

5.  The defendant was arrested the day after the attack.  Under caution, he admitted his presence in the bar.

6.  His best mitigation is his plea of guilty.  The defendant is 23 years old and has a criminal record.  He has six previous convictions, but none involve offences of violence.  In 2009 he was sentenced to probation when he was 16 years old, but not long after breached that probation order, resulting in him serving a rehabilitation centre order.  In 2011, when he was 18, he was convicted of two theft offences, for which he was sentenced to suspended sentences which he ultimately breached.  In 2012 he was sentenced to drug addiction treatment centre for possession of dangerous drugs.  Lastly, in 2014, he was sentenced to training centre for trafficking dangerous drugs.

7.  I have been told the defendant left school after Form 3 and has worked since as a transportation worker and, at the time of his arrest, a construction site worker.  He lives with his mother and sister. Unfortunately, his father died very recently in July this year, when the defendant was in custody for this offence.

8.  I have had a letter of mitigation from the defendant expressing his remorse for his actions.  He is shameful that he has disappointed his mother and in fact unable to attend and arrange his own father’s funeral.  Despite this, his mother is still supportive and in court today.  The defendant is very sorry for his actions and accepts responsibility.  He promises to turn over a new leaf for the sake of his mother and in his father’s memory.  I hope he keeps this promise.

9.  Mr Leung has said all he can in mitigation on the defendant’s behalf.

10.  The facts of this case are very serious.  The action taken by the defendant and his friends can in no way be said to be deserved by the victim.  He cannot be said to have provoked the defendant to deserve what followed.  This was a premeditated attack in a very public place. This was an attack by six men on one which can only be described as cowardly. The victim stood no chance to defend himself.  Weapons were involved, beef knives that caused very serious injury.  In fact, it could have been so much more serious.  The victim was attacked with knives, fists and chairs whilst on the ground.  Clearly this group intended to cause the victim really serious injury.

11.  These are all factors that I cannot ignore.  The best mitigating factors are the defendant’s plea and the fact he has no previous similar convictions involving violent offences.

12.  Defendant, please stand up.  Mr Leung is entirely correct; there are no tariffs or guidelines for this offence.  Sentence and starting point depends heavily on the facts of each case.  After considering mitigation put forward and the facts of this case, including those factors I have outlined as well as mitigating ones, I will, after careful consideration, take a starting point of 5 years’ imprisonment.

13.  You have pleaded guilty.  You are entitled to a discount of one-third.

14.  After that discount is applied, for this offence you are sentenced to 3 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.  Do you understand that sentence?

DEFENDANT: Yes.