|
DCCC971 & 1037/2010(CONS)
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONGSPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NOS. 971 & 1037 OF 2010 (CONSOLIDATED)
----------------------
| |
HKSAR |
|
| |
v. |
|
| |
Leung Ka-po (D2) |
|
----------------------
|
Before:
|
Deputy District Judge Chainrai
|
|
Date:
|
24 February 2011 at 4.29 pm
|
|
Present:
|
Mr F N Chan, Finny, Counsel on fiat, for HKSAR
Ms P W Wong, instructed by Bobby Tse & Co., assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the 2nd Defendant
|
|
Offence:
|
(7) Common assault (普通襲擊)
|
----------------------------
Reasons for Sentence
----------------------------
1. The defendant has been convicted on his own plea on Count 7 on the indictment which is an offence of common assault.
2. The facts in relation to this were admitted by him at the outset and what he admitted was that he approached the victim, Liu Chun-kit, at 2230 hours on 28 August 2010 at the ground floor of Ko’s House at No. 577-578 of Nathan Road, Yau Ma Tei. At that time Mr Liu was chatting with a female. The defendant scolded him in foul language and slapped him on the face. When he attempted to hit him again, Mr Liu warded him off. The defendant scolded Mr Liu again in foul language and then went off.
3. Mr Liu did not sustain any injuries as a result of this assault.
4. Ms Wong has addressed me on the defendant’s background, that he is now aged 37, educated up to Form 3 and he was one of the partners in the Fire Café at the 9th floor of Ko’s House. Although he is not married, he has a relationship with his girlfriend and they have two children aged 16 years and 8 years old respectively.
5. He has been in custody in this matter since 6 September 2010, which is just short of 6 months in custody already. But for his involvement with the other offences herein, this matter would most probably have been dealt with in the magistracy and I do bear that in mind.
6. On the offence, I will take as a starting point 3 months’ imprisonment, discount this by one-third to reflect his plea and he is sentenced to 2 months’ imprisonment. As he has already been in custody far longer than that, he will be released immediately.
7. He is, by his conviction for the present offence, in breach of the bond of $1,000 that was imposed in KC2518/2010. That was a bond to keep the peace and be of good behaviour by abstaining from using violence or committing or attempting to commit any criminal act involving the use of violence or threat of violence against any person. By the present conviction, he is in breach of that bond. I can see no reason not to activate that bond. That bond is therefore activated and he is ordered to pay that $1,000.
| |
Deputy District Judge Chainrai |
|