HKSAR v. LO KIN SIN

DCCC805/2011

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 805 OF 2011

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  The defendant pleaded guilty to one offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, the offence occurring on 21 June 2011.

2.  The defendant agreed the summary of facts, which showed that the defendant and the victim were known to each other.

3.  The defendant is aged 53 and the victim is a fairly young man, still 28 years old, and there seems to have been a history between them in the sense that the defendant had given or loaned a ruby or a diamond ring to the victim and this had not been returned.

4.  The facts agreed by the defendant show that he was at an MTR station at 6 o’clock in the evening on 21 June.  He grabbed the victim’s neck with his left hand, took out a 15-inch-long hammer from his bag and raised it to the head level in his right hand.

5.  Fortunately, at that point, the defendant was intercepted, so nothing worse could happen.

6.  As far as the victim was concerned, there were some red marks on his neck and upper left arm, so very minor injuries.

7.  The gravamen of the offence really lies in the potential use of the hammer.

8.  Now, there is some surprising evidence in this case, which is suggestive and supports the defendant’s proposition that the hammer was used for cracking walnuts and that it had not been specifically brought along to enforce the defendant’s rights, as it were in this case, but nevertheless though, the defendant did appear to potentially use this as a threatening weapon.

9.  That, in this case, made the offence more serious.

10.  The defendant has some minor convictions for breaching condition of stay and possession of forged trademarks, being fined in the past back in the 1990s.

11.  I obtained a report to see if the defendant was capable of serving community service.

12.  The defendant has an excellent report from Probation Services, which shows that he is married and has three children, described to be living in the conditions of an average middle-class family.  He is described as being a responsible, caring husband and father.

13.  He has some health problems.  The report shows he suffers from multiple chronic diseases:  diabetes, hypertension, renal impairment.

14.  He does a lot of community care in relation to art troupes and performances, and entertaining what are described as “grassroot” people, and in respect of the involvement with PW1, the probation officer sees the defendant as somewhat of a victim in this case, certainly been wronged by PW1 in PW1’s retention of the defendant’s property.

15.  The probation officer takes the view the defendant has done a lot of community service work in the past and thus does not see the point in making him do further such work, and his deteriorating health seems unable to allow him to shoulder any extra community work at present.

16.  So it would appear that the defendant is not in a position to assist the community any further, which should gain credit from the work that he has done in the community over many years.

17.  I describe this as an unfortunate case.

18.  The probation officer said the defendant became hysterical when he saw the victim.  I think the best word would be “overwrought”.  The defendant obviously lost control of himself and acted completed out of character.

19.  He has pleaded guilty.  He is being completely frank about his involvement in the offence.

20.  To reflect the gravity of the potential assault, I will impose a sentence of imprisonment, but I shall suspend its operation because I consider there are exceptional circumstances in this case that would warrant it.

21.  What I shall do is impose a sentence of 1 years’ imprisonment, suspended for 2 years.

22.  That means the defendant does not go to prison immediately.  If he commits any further offence punishable by imprisonment in the next two years, he will be liable to serve that term of imprisonment.

COURT: Mr Lo, do you understand this?

A. I understand.

COURT: All right, thank you.