A A
B DCCC 1105/2012 B
C C
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
D HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION D
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1105 OF 2012
E E
-----------------------------------
F HKSAR F
v.
G G
KWOK Chak-yam (D1)
H LEE Chun-lung (D2) H
-----------------------------------
I I
Before: HH Judge E. Yip
J Date: 24 April 2013 at 9:42 am J
Present: Mr A.M. OMAR, Counsel on Fiat, for HKSAR
K K
Mr WONG Ting Kwong Peter, instructed by M/s K.B. Chau
L & Co assigned by DLA for D1 L
Mr CHAN Gee Ming Kenneth, instructed by M/s Haldanes
M M
assigned by DLA for D2
N Offence: (1) Wounding（傷人） N
O
(2) Criminal damage（刑事損壞） O
----------------------------
P P
Reasons for Sentence
Q ---------------------------- Q
Charges
R R
S 1. D1 and D2 plead guilty to a joint charge of wounding under s. S
19 of the Offences against the Person Ordinance, Cap. 212. D1 pleads
T T
U U
V V
- 2 -
A A
B guilty to a charge of criminal damage under s. 60(1) of the Crimes B
Ordinance, Cap. 200.
C C
D Facts of 1st Charge D
E E
2. At about 1:10 a.m. on 30 September 2012, a group of 10
F people including D1 and D2 entered an amusement game centre known as F
“Sands Game” situated at Richmond Plaza, Jaffe Road, Hong Kong. One
G G
of them shouted, “Who is Hop To Chai?” in a foul language. They then
H attacked PW1, who was playing computer games, with fists and kicks as H
well as a chair and a stool for about 30 seconds. PW1 remained conscious
I I
but suffered bleeding at the back of his head, pain at the right side of his
J face and injuries to his arms. He called the police. J
K K
3. The attendant medical officer found abrasion, erythema on his
L L
right thigh and left arm with 2 lacerations on his head. Suture was done.
M
He was discharged on the same day of admission. He was granted 6 days’ M
sick leave.
N N
O 4. On 1 October 2012, after arrest and caution for the attack, D1 O
admitted his presence but denied having assaulted PW1. Based on the
P P
image captured by the CCTV of Sands Game of an assailant wearing a
Q particular T-shirt, the police seized from his home the same T-shirt which Q
he admitted to have worn at the time of the incident.
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 3 -
A A
B Facts of 2nd Charge B
C C
5. At 2:49 a.m. on 30 September 2012, D1 together with other
D people went to Neway Karaoke Box at Sugar Street, Hong Kong for D
entertainment. They took up Room 114. At about 4:00 a.m., one of them
E E
disputed their bill with the manager PW3. At about 5:45 a.m., 6 to 8
F people including D1 ran to the lobby and damaged a television screen, a F
PlayStation game machine and an advertisement board. They left without
G G
paying the bill. It was later revealed that 2 microphones and glasses in
H Room 114 had been damaged. The total cost to fix the damage was about H
$11,600.
I I
J 6. The CCTV at the premises captured the image of D1 leaving J
the premises.
K K
L L
D1’s personal background and mitigation
M M
7. D1 is 19 years of age, of F. 1 education level. He had worked
N N
in various eateries in a span of 3 years after leaving school. He was
O sentenced to probations in February 2011 (E/256/11) and October 2011 O
(E/3533/11) respectively for common assault. E/256/11 concerned a boy
P P
whose sister had not repaid a debt to a schoolmate. He was brought to a
Q park by a group including D1. D1 slapped his face once in the ensuing Q
confrontation. E/3533/11 concerned a boy who was attacked by D1
R R
together with 4 others due to a trivial dispute as the boy and the boy’s
S girlfriend walked past a playground in the Western District. The boy S
suffered injuries from their fists and kicks. The present offences are in
T T
breach of the second probation (E/3533/11).
U U
V V
- 4 -
A A
B B
8. I am told that he beat up PW1 as he was told to do so without
C C
any personal reason.
D D
9. He has paid into court a sum of $14,600 as voluntary
E E
compensation to PW1 ($3,000) and Neway Karaoke ($11,600).
F F
10. His counsel urges me to consider the Detention Centre apart
G G
from the Training Centre. CSD’s suitability report regards him unsuitable
H for the Detention Centre because of his liver problem. The Training Centre H
is regarded as suitable. I understand from his counsel that he wishes to be
I I
sent to prison instead of the Training Centre.
J J
D2’s personal background and mitigation
K K
L L
11. D2 is 24 years of age, of F. 3 education level. He had never
M
held a job. For a number of years since his father’s death, he had received M
little guidance from his mother. He would demand money from his mother,
N N
a menial worker. Among his numerous convictions for which he was
O given probation or sent to DATC or prison, there were 4 for violence as O
follows:
P P
Q (1) Assault occasioning actual bodily harm (2002); Q
(2) Criminal damage (2008);
R R
(3) Assault occasioning actual bodily harm (2008);
S (4) Wounding (2010). S
T T
U U
V V
- 5 -
A A
B 12. I have obtained more information about him from his B
Background Report. In 2000, he was assessed to be a mild-grade mental
C C
retardate by an educational psychologist. He was then placed in a special
D school. He often skipped classes. He mixed with dubious peers after D
school. He had become a triad member and engaged in gang fights. To
E E
make matters worse, he has had a habit of drug abuse.
F F
13. In Court I am told that he beat up PW1 as he was told to do so
G G
without any personal reason. His Background Report revealed that he
H committed the present offence to help his triad followers to settle conflicts H
with others.
I I
J Statutory penalty J
K K
14. The maximum for s. 19 wounding is imprisonment for 3 years
L L
and for criminal damage is imprisonment for life. There are no sentencing
M
guidelines for either offence. M
N N
Imprisonment or other options
O O
15. Section 109A of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, Cap. 221,
P P
provides:
Q Q
R
(1) No court shall sentence a person of or over 16 and under 21 R
years of age to imprisonment unless the court is of opinion that
no other method of dealing with such person is appropriate; and
S for the purpose of determining whether any other method of S
dealing with any such person is appropriate the court shall
obtain and consider information about the circumstances, and
T T
shall take into account any information before the court which is
U U
V V
- 6 -
A A
B relevant to the character of such person and his physical and B
mental condition.
C (1A) This section shall not apply to a person who has been C
convicted of any offence which is declared to be an excepted
offence by Schedule 3.
D D
E 16. The offence of s. 19 wounding is an excepted offence by E
Schedule 3. Imprisonment is thus not a deferred option.
F F
G Detention Centre or Training Centre G
H H
17. According to s. 4(2)(b) of the Detention Centres Ordinance,
I Cap. 239, a person under the age of 21 shall be detained for between 1 I
month and 6 months, the exact duration to be determined by the
J J
Commissioner of CSD having regard to his health and conduct.
K K
18. According to s. 2 of the Training Centres Ordinance, Cap. 280,
L L
a person under the age of 21 shall be detained for between 6 months and 3
M years, the exact duration to be determined by the Commissioner of CSD. M
N N
Sentencing D1 and D2
O O
19. It was an unprovoked attack of a single victim by a gang of 10.
P P
They were looking for “Hop To Chai”. The attack had a triad cause. A
Q chair and a stool at the premises were used. The victim suffered some Q
R
injuries not of a serious nature. The criminal damage to the karaoke was in R
revenge for an unabated bill. There was no extensive damage.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 7 -
A A
B 20. I am satisfied that it is in the best interest of D1 and the B
community to have him placed in the Training Centre for the 2 charges
C C
together. His probation (E/3533/11) is hereby discharged.
D D
21. I do not see it a mitigating factor D2’s being a mild-grade
E E
mental retardate. Over the past 10 years, he has had enough mentality
F gained from his experience of incarceration to warn him off the wrong side F
of the law. His repeat convictions for violence over the years should be an
G G
st
aggravating factor. I take 27 months as the starting point for the 1 Charge.
H I reduce it to 18 months in recognition of his plea of guilty. There are no H
other mitigating factors. He is sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment.
I I
J J
K K
L L
M M
( E. Yip )
N District Judge N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V