HCCC341/2024 HKSAR v. TAM WAI MAN STEPHANIE - LawHero
HCCC341/2024
HKSAR v. TAM WAI MAN STEPHANIE
高等法院（刑事）Barnes J23/6/2025[2025] HKCFI 3111
HCCC341/2024
A A
HCCC 341/2024
[2025] HKCFI 3111
B B
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
C C
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CRIMINAL CASE NO 341 OF 2024
D D
-----------------
E HKSAR E
F
v F
Tam Wai-man, Stephanie
G G
------------------
H Before: Hon Barnes J H
Date: 24 June 2025 at 2.36 pm
I Present: Mr Lui Tsz-ming Ira, ADPP of the Department of Justice, I
for HKSAR
Miss Wu Ho-see Joyce, instructed by Tse Yuen Ting Wong,
J assigned by DLA, for the accused J
Offence: Murder (謀殺)
K K
---------------------------------
Transcript of the Audio Recording
L of the Sentence in the above Case L
---------------------------------
M COURT: The defendant, Tam Wai-man, Stephanie, faced one count of M
murder, contrary to Common Law and punishable under section
2 of the Offences Against the Person Ordinance, Chapter 212.
N N
She pleaded not guilty to murder but guilty to manslaughter
by reason of diminished responsibility before me. The
O prosecution accepted her plea on that basis with my approval. O
I found the defendant guilty of manslaughter by reason of
diminished responsibility after she admitted to the Summary
P of Facts. P
Q
Now the Summary of Facts. The defendant was born in 1979. Q
She married her husband surnamed Hui - I will call him Mr Hui
- in 2019, and a son named Jasper, who was the deceased in
R this case, was born on 5 January 2021. Since September 2021, R
the family was residing at a public housing unit at Shui Pin
Wai Estate, Yuen Long. I will refer to that place as “the
S Flat”. S
T Mr Hui was at all material times a furniture salesman, whereas T
the defendant had been a full-time housewife after giving
birth to Jasper. At the time of birth, Jasper was diagnosed
U with a minor skull problem, but no follow-up was required U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 1 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
after February 2022. Meanwhile, Jasper suffered from a
condition known as torticollis, and physiotherapy was
B recommended. In addition to the monthly appointment with the B
physiotherapist, advice was given that Jasper’s shoulder
needed to be massaged for 10 minutes each day. When massaged,
C C
Jasper would often scream and cry.
D Now, the events leading to Jasper’s death. In the evening on D
27 May 2022, Mr Hui heard the 16-month-old Jasper crying when
being massaged by the defendant. He therefore told the
E defendant to stop, and the defendant was taken aback. She E
said nothing and took Jasper to the bedroom.
F F
On 28 May 2022, Mr Hui left the Flat at around 8.30 am for
work, leaving the defendant and Jasper at home. The defendant
G was then sleeping on their bed, whereas Jasper was sleeping G
in his crib. Upon Mr Hui’s return to the Flat at about 8.55
pm, he found Jasper’s crib was moved from the bedroom to the
H living room. The bedroom door was shut. Entering the H
bedroom, Mr Hui found near the bed a pan of burning charcoal
I placed on a portable gas stove. The gap at the bottom of the I
door was blocked with a blanket. At that time, the door for
the cats connecting the bedroom and the living room and the
J plastic curtain separating the living room and the balcony J
were both sealed with adhesive tapes.
K A suicide note written by the defendant was found next to the K
couple’s bed. The defendant apologised for her selfish
L behaviour. She expressed frustration at being disliked by L
Jasper and scolded by Mr Hui for massaging Jasper when the
daily massage was recommended by the physiotherapist.
M Unwilling to live with Mr Hui anymore or to leave Jasper to M
Mr Hui’s care, she decided to leave the world with Jasper.
N N
Mr Hui found the defendant and Jasper lying on the bed inside
the bedroom. He immediately removed the pan of charcoal to
O the living room and made a report to the police. At that O
time, Jasper was unconscious and not breathing, whereas the
defendant was gasping for breath.
P P
A number of ambulance men soon arrived at the Flat. They
detected no breathing or pulse in Jasper. They examined the
Q Q
defendant and found her breathing and had no observable
injuries. The defendant and Jasper were rushed to Pok Oi
R Hospital for medical treatment. R
On arrival at the Pok Oi Hospital at 9.22 pm, Jasper was in
S a coma with no breath, pulse or blood pressure. CPR and S
resuscitation were performed. Urgent blood testing showed
that the blood carboxyhaemoglobin level was at 77 per cent,
T T
well above the lethal level of 50 per cent, whereas the blood
oxyhaemoglobin level was only at 8 per cent, substantially
U below the normal level. Jasper failed to respond to U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 2 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
resuscitation and was certified dead at 10.19 pm on 28 May
2022.
B B
And now the treatment of the defendant. The defendant was
unconscious upon arrival at the Accident and Emergency
C C
Department of the Pok Oi Hospital. Both pupils were sluggish
in response, and her blood carboxyhaemoglobin level was 27.3
D per cent on arrival, which was above the toxic level of 20 D
per cent but below the lethal level of 50 per cent.
Meanwhile, her blood oxyhaemoglobin level was at 71.1 per
E cent, well below the normal level of 94 per cent to 97 per E
cent. Her condition was compatible with carbon monoxide
F
poisoning. She was transferred to the Intensive Care Unit of F
the Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital for further
management. There she received hyperbaric oxygen therapy on
G 29 and 30 May 2022. She was transferred back to the Pok Oi G
Hospital for treatment in the ICU on 30 May 2022.
H On 3 June 2022, the defendant was admitted to the Castle Peak H
Hospital and was provisionally diagnosed with depressive
I episode. She was given an antidepressant. She was later I
discharged from Castle Peak Hospital to attend court on 7
June 2022.
J J
During her remand at the Castle Peak Hospital from 3 to 7 June
2022, the defendant was examined by a psychiatrist, Dr
K Kimberly Yip. In her report, Dr Yip stated that the defendant K
was new to mental health services, and she had no reported
L family history of mental illness. The defendant also denied L
psychotic symptoms or history of being abused. Meanwhile,
the defendant reported a deterioration of mood in the past
M two years due to a number of stressors, including: M
(1) deteriorating marital relationship with Mr Hui;
N N
(2) health issues relating to Jasper, and
O O
(3) financial stress in that Mr Hui had accumulated a
credit card debt of some HK$30,000 to HK$40,000 in
P the past year. P
Harbouring fleeting suicidal ideas, the defendant bought a
Q Q
bag of charcoal in January 2022 and hid it in her closet.
She also purchased a bottle of hypnotics. One month prior to
R the incident, her mood further worsened due to her son’s R
health condition and the lack of support from Mr Hui. She,
however, largely maintained her sleep or appetite.
S S
Now the inquiries at the scene. The police conducted
inquiries inside the Flat and found, among other things, the
T T
following:
U U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 3 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
(a) a suicide note next to the couple’s bed in the
bedroom;
B B
(b) a blanket on the floor inside the bedroom next to
the door;
C C
(c) a pan of ashes on a portable gas stove in the living
D room just outside the bedroom; D
(d) the plastic curtain separating the living room and
E the balcony and the cat door were both sealed with E
adhesive tapes;
F F
(e) a bag of charcoal inside the kitchen;
G (f) a metal cup, a spoon and a syringe in the kitchen G
sink;
H (g) a bottle of “Natrol” Melatonin tablets with H
89 pills therein.
I I
The metal cup was found to contain about 100 millilitres of
a liquid containing Melatonin, which is a hypnotic, whereas
J the syringe contained traces of a liquid containing Melatonin J
and Ibuprofen. It is an anti-inflammatory medicine.
K Now the autopsy of Jasper. Autopsy was performed on Jasper K
by forensic pathologist Dr Tsang Chak-chi on 31 May 2022.
L Apart from cherry red hypostasis on the back of the body and L
a small abrasion on the right big toe, no recent external
injuries were found. Nor was there any obvious congenital
M deformity. M
Toxicological analysis of bodily samples taken from Jasper
N N
revealed that carboxyhaemoglobin was detected in the blood at
a level of 64 per cent saturation. Melatonin was detected in
O the blood at a level of 0.05 microgrammes per millilitre and O
in the stomach content.
P The autopsy revealed no natural disease that could account P
for the death of Jasper. Dr Tsang confirmed that:
Q Q
(1) the presence of carboxyhaemoglobin in the blood at
a level of 64 per cent was sufficient to be fatal;
R R
(2) carbon monoxide has a higher affinity to
haemoglobin than oxygen, causing tissue hypoxia,
S and it could directly cause cellular toxicity by S
inhibiting cytochrome oxidase that worsens hypoxia;
and
T T
U U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 4 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
(3) Melatonin is a dietary supplement for treating
sleep disorder and is also produced endogenously in
B humans. B
In view of those findings, Dr Tsang concluded that Jasper’s
C C
cause of death was carbon monoxide poisoning.
D Now the cautioned interview of the defendant. Following the D
defendant’s return to the Pok Oi Hospital on 30 May 2022, the
police approached her for inquiries on 1 June 2022. The
E officers conducted an interview with the defendant in Ward 7S. E
During the 45-minute video-recorded interview, the defendant
F
was arrested for the killing of Jasper. Under caution, she F
admitted that she had done so because she was unhappy at home.
G In her interview, the defendant made a full and detailed G
admission of the offence. She stated that Mr Hui had scolded
her in the evening of 27 May 2022 for massaging Jasper. She
H was unhappy and cried. As a result, she decided to commit H
suicide with Jasper by charcoal burning on the following day.
I I
In the morning on 28 May 2022, the defendant woke up at around
9 am and had breakfast. Sometime after 11 am, she used
J adhesive tapes to seal the curtain separating the living room J
and the balcony as well as the cat door. She wrote a suicide
note by copying a draft she had previously stored in her
K mobile phone. Later on, she grinded four sleeping pills, K
mixed the powder with water and fed them to Jasper with a
L syringe. She then took eight sleeping pills herself. After L
doing so, she set up the gas stove, burned the charcoal and
placed the stove inside the bedroom. She and Jasper fell
M asleep together. It was her intention to die with Jasper. M
The defendant admitted purchasing the bag of charcoal and
N N
liquefied gas cartridge in early 2022 with a view to commit
suicide. Mr Hui did not know about these items. When shown
O a bottle of Melatonin pills found in the kitchen, the O
defendant admitted purchasing it online in January 2022 for
consumption when burning charcoal. She fed four tablets to
P Jasper and consumed eight tablets herself. She had not P
consumed those pills previously.
Q Q
The defendant stated that she had harboured the idea of
committing suicide for over a year since 2021. She felt that
R she had been poorly treated by Mr Hui. When asked for R
specifics, the defendant identified two incidents. Firstly,
Mr Hui had once dragged her out of the bedroom following an
S argument over monetary affairs. He then forcefully pressed S
her down on a chair and refused to let her go. Secondly,
during an argument in 2021 over a possible divorce and a
T T
contest over custody of Jasper, Mr Hui grabbed hold of her
hand and tried to take Jasper away from her. She refused to
U let go and Mr Hui pressed on her hand forcefully. On the U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 5 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
impact on her as a result of her arguments with Mr Hui, the
defendant said that they had adversely affected her temper
B but denied being paranoid. She had never told anyone about B
her suicide plan and had never attempted suicide before.
C C
Now background inquiries on the defendant. Inquiries were
made with the defendant’s mother and social worker.
D D
Prior to the incident, the defendant had been complaining to
her mother about her arguments with Mr Hui, but the mother
E had no knowledge about the reason for the defendant’s suicide E
attempt. Meanwhile, the social worker confirmed that she had
F
met the defendant in person twice, in October 2021 and April F
2022 respectively. On both occasions, the defendant
discussed her marital problem and her argument with Mr Hui
G but made no mention of her suicidal thoughts or that she had G
been subjected to domestic violence.
H Now the defendant’s psychiatric condition. Prior to this H
offence, the defendant was not known to the public mental
I health system. Reports from two specialist psychiatrists I
have been obtained and they were placed before the court.
J The first one is a report from Dr Li Cheuk-wing, a specialist J
in psychiatry in private practice, dated 25 March 2024. In
preparing his report, Dr Li had interviewed the defendant at
K the Tai Lam Centre for Women for around two hours and 20 K
minutes on 27 February 2024.
L L
The second report is by Dr Dorothy Tang Yuen-yee, visiting
psychiatrist of the Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre, dated 23 July
M 2024. In compilation of her report, Dr Tang had repeatedly M
examined the defendant during the defendant’s remand at the
Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre.
N N
Both psychiatrists are of the opinion that at the time of the
O killing, the defendant suffered from Major Depressive O
Disorder in accordance with the Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition, called DSM-5. Her
P Major Depressive Disorder was classified as severe. Her P
symptoms included pervasive low mood, weight loss, poor sleep,
low energy level, feeling of worthlessness and recurrent
Q Q
suicidal ideation. She was then suffering from an abnormality
of mind arising from Major Depressive Disorder which had or
R had likely substantially impaired her ability to form rational R
judgment and exercise self-control.
S And before me, the defendant accepted and admitted that she S
had on 28 May 2022, in Hong Kong, unlawfully killed Jasper by
burning charcoal inside the Flat. She pleaded guilty to
T T
manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility in
satisfaction of the indictment for murder.
U U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 6 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
Now the background and mitigation. The defendant was born in
October 1979, so she is now 45 years of age. She had a clear
B record. Defence counsel, Miss Joyce Wu, in her written B
submission basically provided information on the defendant to
fill the gaps left out in the Admitted Facts.
C C
The defendant was said not to have a close relationship with
D her father who was strict or her mother or her sister when D
she was growing up. She did not do well academically but she
attended courses after she finished secondary school and
E obtained qualification to work as an accounts clerk. The E
defendant had a couple of failed romances before she met
F
Mr Hui. She was very happy when she got married with Mr Hui F
in Okinawa, with the ceremony attended by family and friends.
G Shortly after the wedding, the defendant fell pregnant. G
Mr Hui, who was then a divorcee and already had a daughter
with his ex-wife, was not keen to start a family with the
H defendant even though he and the defendant had discussed about H
this and he had agreed. He then even asked the defendant to
I have an abortion which the defendant refused. Mr Hui was not I
supportive throughout the defendant’s pregnancy and did not
accompany her to antenatal appointments. He also threw
J tantrums and shouted at the defendant over trivial matters. J
After Jasper was born, Jasper was found to have something
K wrong with his skull. He also suffered from torticollis, K
meaning that his little head leaned to one side. The
L defendant was very worried about it and she was required to L
take Jasper for physiotherapy on a regular basis. Mr Hui did
not accompany her to take Jasper to those appointments. The
M defendant was advised by the physiotherapist to massage little M
Jasper’s neck twice every day but the poor baby screamed and
cried when she did so. Mr Hui did not help with the massage
N N
but told defendant to stop doing so, saying that it was of no
use. According to the defendant, Mr Hui did not help to take
O care of Jasper either. When Mr Hui was at home on leave, he O
played games with his mobile phone or the two cats they kept
at home.
P P
The relationship between the defendant and Mr Hui had gotten
worse. Apart from the discord over Jasper’s condition, the
Q Q
defendant also found out that Mr Hui owed several ten thousand
credit card debts. Not only that Mr Hui did not give the
R defendant any emotional support, he did not give her financial R
support either. As the defendant stopped working after Jasper
was born, she was using her own savings for household expenses
S and buying things for Jasper. She worried about her own S
financial position. She was tearful when she was with Mr
Hui.
T T
Jasper was born at the time when the COVID-19 pandemic was
U rife. Mr Hui forbade the defendant to take Jasper out. The U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 7 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
defendant could only secretly take Jasper out to attend church
or see her family when Mr Hui was at work, and she had to be
B back home before Mr Hui returned home. The defendant felt B
suffocated, helpless, lonely, exhausted and melancholy. She
did not realise that her mental health was deteriorating and
C C
that she suffered from Major Depressive Disorder. As
disclosed in the Admitted Facts, the defendant sought help
D from a social worker. However, Mr Hui put the blame on the D
defendant, and the family problem could not be resolved.
There had been occasions when Mr Hui was physically aggressive
E to the defendant. E
F
When the defendant suggested divorce, Mr Hui threatened to F
take custody of Jasper. The defendant felt imprisoned in an
unhappy marriage with no way out. She felt unloved and
G useless, and she harboured suicidal ideas. She bought G
charcoal and ordered hypnotic pills online in case she wanted
to kill herself. However, the idea of suicide soon subsided.
H H
On the evening before the offence, defendant was told off by
I Mr Hui when she massaged Jasper’s shoulder in accordance with I
the advice from the physiotherapist. She became upset and
cried. She decided to commit suicide with burning charcoal
J and taking Jasper with her. The defendant was worried that J
Mr Hui would not take care of Jasper after she was gone, and
Mr Hui had never shown any interest in Jasper, just like he
K showed no interest in the daughter he had with his ex-wife. K
In the defendant’s warped mind, she thought Jasper would be
L better off with her in heaven, and she proceeded to commit L
suicide and to kill Jasper at the same time by burning
charcoal in the bedroom of the Flat as outlined in the
M Admitted Facts. M
The defendant was utterly upset when she found out that she
N N
did not die but her beloved son Jasper had died. It was not
known at the time of the offence that the defendant was
O suffering from a severe case of Major Depressive Disorder. O
Miss Wu submitted that the defendant’s condition had since
improved. The defendant had since divorced Mr Hui. Her
P relationship with her parents and her sister had improved. P
From being introverted and feeling small and useless, she had
become active and sociable. She engaged herself fervently
Q Q
with matters concerning her Christian faith, and she gained
the trust and support from people working for the church,
R Christian organisation and inmates. These people, together R
with the defendant’s family members and friends, wrote to
this Court, asking for leniency on behalf of the defendant.
S S
Miss Wu referred to the cases submitted by the prosecution,
to which I will refer later, and submitted that the
T T
circumstances of the present case is not as serious as those
submitted. Miss Wu particularly emphasised the change in the
U defendant since her remand and the discovery of her mental U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 8 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
illness. The defendant had shown great improvement in her
social skill and ability. The defendant has unwavering
B support from her family and the church. Not only that she B
continued to further her studies to equip herself, she also
encouraged her fellow inmates to do so. As I have mentioned,
C C
her fellow inmates also wrote to this Court, seeking leniency
on the defendant’s behalf.
D D
Miss Wu also placed emphasis on the fact that the defendant
had been in custody for three years which, it is submitted,
E is equivalent to a sentence of 4½ years after remission, E
meaning a starting point of 6¾ years. Miss Wu asked this
F
Court to exercise compassion and consider imposing a Probation F
Order. I decided to call for a Probation Officer’s report
and an up-to-date psychiatric report on the defendant prior
G to sentence. G
Now the Probation Officer’s report. The probation officer,
H Ms Chu, after giving me a very detailed report on the H
defendant and her relationship with various people, in
I particular Mr Hui and Jasper, prior to the killing, I
recommended that provided the defendant is considered
suitable for outpatient psychiatric treatment, a 12-month
J Probation Order with special condition that the defendant J
shall receive psychiatric and/or psychological treatment as
directed by the PO.
K K
The further up-to-date psychiatric reports. I have up-to-
L date psychiatric reports from two psychiatrists, L
Dr Dorothy Tang and Dr Kimberly Yip. I do not think there is
any need to repeat the background and the diagnosis mentioned
M in the reports. Both doctors recommended a Hospital Order of M
9 months to be served in Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre followed
by inpatient psychiatric rehabilitation and psychological
N N
input focusing on her emotion regulation and stress coping at
Castle Peak Hospital upon the expiration of her sentence.
O O
Bearing in mind the defendant was admitted into the Siu Lam
Psychiatric Centre on 7 June 2022 and was transferred to
P Tai Lam Correctional Institute for Women in April 2023, P
indicating on the face of it that the defendant was not
receiving inpatient treatment in the Correctional Services
Q Q
Department, I asked for further psychiatric report to clarify
this.
R On the adjourned hearing on 24 June 2025, which is today, I R
had the further reports by both Dr Kimberly Yip and Dr Dorothy
Tang. I do not think there is any need to go into details of
S these reports. Suffice it to say that both doctors had given S
me sufficient explanation why there is still a need for the
defendant to receive inpatient treatment. Just to mention it
T T
briefly, while the defendant’s symptoms had been well
controlled with pharmacological treatment, symptoms control
U is often the first stage of treatment to be followed by U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 9 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
consolidation of her improvement and relapse prevention.
Thorough rehabilitation programme is difficult to conduct
B during the remand period as the defendant would be preoccupied B
with the legal proceedings and outcome of the case.
C C
So in view of the gravity of the offence and the high suicide
and violence risks associated with the defendant’s severe
D Major Depressive Disorder, a Hospital Order for 9 months is D
recommended. I should mention here that through her counsel,
the defendant asked to be sent to Castle Peak Hospital to
E serve the Hospital Order if the court so ordered. I E
understand from both doctors that a Hospital Order will be
F
served at the Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre under the F
Correctional Services Department. That will be the first
stage of rehabilitation focusing upon various treatments.
G G
Upon expiry of the Hospital Order, the defendant will be
transferred to the Castle Peak Hospital for the second stage,
H which focuses on community integration. Both Dr Tang and Dr H
Yip will continue to be the defendant’s psychiatrists, whether
I at the Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre or at the Castle Peak I
Hospital.
J Now, I will mention the authorities. Mr Lui for the J
prosecution very helpfully referred me to five cases. All
involved defendants facing murder charges be eventually found
K guilty of manslaughter on the basis of diminished K
responsibility, either by the defendant pleading guilty to
L such, or being accepted by the prosecution, or by the Court L
of Appeal quashing the verdict of murder and substituting it
with manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility.
M M
Now, the first case is R v Lee Sau Ping, CACC 189/1995. This
is a case decided in 1995 on appeal. The defendant killed
N N
her five-year-old daughter and was charged with murder. She
was sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment. Her application for
O leave to appeal against sentence was dismissed. The facts O
disclosed that the defendant had previously abused the victim,
and the victim was under the care of Po Leung Kuk. The
P defendant took the victim out from Po Leung Kuk and reported P
her being taken to the Mainland by her friend. A report was
made to the police. The victim was found nine days later,
Q Q
dead inside a nylon bag near a pier. Defendant admitted she
had put the victim inside the bag and dumped her into the sea
R to drown her. There was no dispute that the defendant had R
planned this for a few days.
S The Court of Appeal said that there was a wide range of S
sentence from probation to life imprisonment. The Court of
Appeal did not think the sentence of 10 years was manifestly
T T
excessive and refused leave.
U U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 10 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
The second case is HKSAR v Chan Ka Fai, CACC 100/2008. This
case involved a defendant stabbing his mother to death. He
B then tried to commit suicide by cutting his own left wrist B
after leaving a suicide note. The defendant lost his job two
months before the killing and pretended to go to work every
C C
day. He was $400,000 in debt and had spent the $600,000 the
family received following the death of his father in a work-
D related accident two years earlier. D
The defendant claimed that after he had told his mother the
E truth, she kept scolding him, which made him annoyed and E
confused. He therefore went to the kitchen and fetched a
F
knife to slash her neck. After she fell onto the sofa, the F
defendant stabbed her indiscriminately and suffocated her
with a cushion. After moving the body to the bedroom and
G tidying up the scene, he wrote a suicide note and attempted G
to kill himself. He was sentenced to 8 years’ imprisonment.
Leave to appeal against sentence was refused.
H H
The third case is HKSAR v Chiu Wai Kan Vicken (No. 2) [2011]
I 5 HKLRD 422. The defendant killed his 75-year-old stepfather. I
At the time of the killing, the defendant was under the
influence of drug-induced psychosis which was self-induced as
J the defendant had started abusing ketamine since the age of J
16. The killing was committed when the defendant was 23.
The defendant was sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment by the
K Court of Appeal when his verdict of murder was quashed and K
substituted by manslaughter by reason of diminished
L responsibility. L
The fourth case is Secretary for Justice v Chan Man Yum Candy
M [2011] 5 HKC 72. This is in fact a case I did. The respondent M
pleaded guilty to manslaughter after killing her 13-month-old
adopted daughter. She was sentenced to 3 years’ probation.
N N
The Secretary for Justice applied for a review of sentence.
O The facts disclosed that the respondent adopted the child O
from a Mainland orphanage. First, the defendant hired a
domestic helper to look after the baby. She later had to
P look after the baby herself after she sacked the first helper P
and then a second helper. The baby had trouble keeping food
down and often cried. The respondent was under stress as her
Q Q
savings were reduced due to the economic situation in 2008.
Her family was concerned about her mental health. The
R respondent sought help and had an appointment with a R
psychiatrist, but the baby was killed before she had the
appointment.
S S
On the day in question, she was exhausted after seeking a
repayment of a loan in the Mainland. She returned to Hong
T T
Kong and picked up the baby from her mother and had an argument
with her mother over the feeding of the baby. The baby was
U in distress when the respondent took her home. A neighbour U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 11 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
saw the respondent repeatedly holding the baby upside down
and throwing her on the ground. The neighbour then saw the
B respondent trying to revive the baby. Within 18 minutes of B
the first abuse, the respondent took the baby to the hospital.
The baby died five days later when the life support machine
C C
was turned off.
D Autopsy showed four fractures of the skull and other injuries. D
There was no indication of previous abuse to the child. The
respondent was subsequently diagnosed as suffering from
E bipolar affective disorder. She was sent to Siu Lam E
Psychiatric Centre. While on remand, the respondent was seen
F
by another psychiatrist who said the offence could be the F
result of extreme frustration and impairment of impulse
control caused by manic symptoms.
G G
The trial judge took full cognisance of the nature of the
violent act and said if the respondent had not been suffering
H from mental illness at the time of the death, a heavy sentence H
would have been imposed. The trial judge recognised there
I were special circumstances and took into account that the I
respondent had done a lot of charity work and made the
probation order. The court heard that the condition of the
J respondent was under control through medication and she had J
complied with the terms of the Probation Order.
K The Court of Appeal dismissed the application, saying, among K
other things, that it is open to a judge to impose a sentence
L on an offender in the position of the respondent other than L
a sentence of imprisonment.
M The last authority is HKSAR v Lee Fung Yee [2011] 5 HKLRD M
351. In that case, the defendant killed her 15-year-old son
and 13-year-old daughter. She was charged with murder. Her
N N
plea of guilty to manslaughter was rejected by the
prosecution. After trial, she was convicted of manslaughter
O by reason of diminished responsibility and sentenced to O
7 years’ imprisonment. On appeal, her sentence was reduced
to one of 4 years. The facts disclosed that the defendant
P met a Taoist priest. We will just call him “H”. She claimed P
to believe H was a god, H took her virginity and used her for
his sexual gratification. She has three children with H,
Q Q
including the two victims.
R When the defendant learned that H had other women, she decided R
to kill herself and the victims as she did not want to leave
them behind. She laced orange juice with sleeping pills
S before burning charcoal in the room. When firemen and police S
came as a result of report made by the caretaker, the
defendant told them she was burning incense and prevented
T T
them from searching the bedroom, saying the victims were
sleeping. She then turned off the phone and went to sleep.
U U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 12 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
When she woke up, she found the two victims dead. Police was
alerted.
B B
At trial, the defendant claimed to be under H’s complete
control and killed the victims in a weakened mental state
C C
after argument with H over other women. The jury accepted
the opinion of a psychiatrist on the defendant and unanimously
D returned a manslaughter verdict. D
The Court of Appeal said, among other things, that protection
E of human life was the foremost objective of our system of E
criminal justice. The community was entitled to expect that
F
the unlawful taking of a life be denounced by a punishment F
that was appropriate to the circumstances. The defendant
bore a high degree of responsibility. The killing was not
G done on the spur of the moment but was carefully planned. G
Parents have no right to decide whether their children should
live or not.
H H
Having regard to the opinion of the psychiatrist, a 7-year
I imprisonment was manifestly excessive. The Court of Appeal I
adopted a starting point of 6 years and reduced it to 4 as
the defendant always intended to plead guilty and did plead
J guilty to manslaughter. J
Of these five authorities, only three concern the killing of
K one’s own child, natural or adopted. I do not find the other K
two authorities particularly helpful. In my view, the
L circumstances of killing in the last case - that is the L
Lee Fung Yee case - were similar to the present one: plan to
kill the victims when the defendant planned to commit suicide;
M administer sleeping pill to victim first, and then burn M
charcoal to kill by the inhalation of carbon monoxide. The
reason triggering the defendant, Lee Fung-yee, and this
N N
defendant to commit suicide and kill the offspring was not
the same but both defendants felt helplessness in their
O situation and were both affected by their mental illness. O
In the present case, while the suicide and killing was
P planned, there was no deliberate act to prevent law P
enforcement officer or fireman from intervening. So I am of
the view that comparatively speaking, the culpability of this
Q Q
defendant, when compared with Lee Yung Yee, was less in scale.
R Having considered all the circumstances of the offence and R
the defendant’s background, including her mental condition at
the time of the offence and her present mental condition, but
S for the fact that two psychiatrists are still of the view S
that the defendant needs inpatient treatment for her mental
illness and is not ready to be released into the society, I
T T
would have considered sentencing the defendant by placing her
on probation with special condition as suggested by the PO,
U U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 13 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
particularly bearing in mind the period the defendant had
already been in custody. That is 3 years.
B B
However, as the defendant is still in need of inpatient
psychiatric treatment, I accept the recommendation of the two
C C
psychiatrists and order the defendant to a Hospital Order for
9 months under section 45 of the Mental Health Ordinance.
D D
So I will pass the actual sentence. Can you stand up, please,
defendant? So for the offence of manslaughter, the defendant
E is sentenced to a Hospital Order for 9 months under section E
45 of the Mental Health Ordinance.
F F
G G
I/we certify that to the best of my/our ability
and skill, the foregoing is a true transcript of
the audio recording of the above proceedings
H H
I I
.........................................
Christine Pagey
Date: 7 July 2025
J J
K K
L L
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 14 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
HCCC 341/2024
[2025] HKCFI 3111
B B
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
C C
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CRIMINAL CASE NO 341 OF 2024
D D
-----------------
E HKSAR E
F
v F
Tam Wai-man, Stephanie
G G
------------------
H Before: Hon Barnes J H
Date: 24 June 2025 at 2.36 pm
I Present: Mr Lui Tsz-ming Ira, ADPP of the Department of Justice, I
for HKSAR
Miss Wu Ho-see Joyce, instructed by Tse Yuen Ting Wong,
J assigned by DLA, for the accused J
Offence: Murder (謀殺)
K K
---------------------------------
Transcript of the Audio Recording
L of the Sentence in the above Case L
---------------------------------
M COURT: The defendant, Tam Wai-man, Stephanie, faced one count of M
murder, contrary to Common Law and punishable under section
2 of the Offences Against the Person Ordinance, Chapter 212.
N N
She pleaded not guilty to murder but guilty to manslaughter
by reason of diminished responsibility before me. The
O prosecution accepted her plea on that basis with my approval. O
I found the defendant guilty of manslaughter by reason of
diminished responsibility after she admitted to the Summary
P of Facts. P
Q
Now the Summary of Facts. The defendant was born in 1979. Q
She married her husband surnamed Hui - I will call him Mr Hui
- in 2019, and a son named Jasper, who was the deceased in
R this case, was born on 5 January 2021. Since September 2021, R
the family was residing at a public housing unit at Shui Pin
Wai Estate, Yuen Long. I will refer to that place as “the
S Flat”. S
T Mr Hui was at all material times a furniture salesman, whereas T
the defendant had been a full-time housewife after giving
birth to Jasper. At the time of birth, Jasper was diagnosed
U with a minor skull problem, but no follow-up was required U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 1 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
after February 2022. Meanwhile, Jasper suffered from a
condition known as torticollis, and physiotherapy was
B recommended. In addition to the monthly appointment with the B
physiotherapist, advice was given that Jasper’s shoulder
needed to be massaged for 10 minutes each day. When massaged,
C C
Jasper would often scream and cry.
D Now, the events leading to Jasper’s death. In the evening on D
27 May 2022, Mr Hui heard the 16-month-old Jasper crying when
being massaged by the defendant. He therefore told the
E defendant to stop, and the defendant was taken aback. She E
said nothing and took Jasper to the bedroom.
F F
On 28 May 2022, Mr Hui left the Flat at around 8.30 am for
work, leaving the defendant and Jasper at home. The defendant
G was then sleeping on their bed, whereas Jasper was sleeping G
in his crib. Upon Mr Hui’s return to the Flat at about 8.55
pm, he found Jasper’s crib was moved from the bedroom to the
H living room. The bedroom door was shut. Entering the H
bedroom, Mr Hui found near the bed a pan of burning charcoal
I placed on a portable gas stove. The gap at the bottom of the I
door was blocked with a blanket. At that time, the door for
the cats connecting the bedroom and the living room and the
J plastic curtain separating the living room and the balcony J
were both sealed with adhesive tapes.
K A suicide note written by the defendant was found next to the K
couple’s bed. The defendant apologised for her selfish
L behaviour. She expressed frustration at being disliked by L
Jasper and scolded by Mr Hui for massaging Jasper when the
daily massage was recommended by the physiotherapist.
M Unwilling to live with Mr Hui anymore or to leave Jasper to M
Mr Hui’s care, she decided to leave the world with Jasper.
N N
Mr Hui found the defendant and Jasper lying on the bed inside
the bedroom. He immediately removed the pan of charcoal to
O the living room and made a report to the police. At that O
time, Jasper was unconscious and not breathing, whereas the
defendant was gasping for breath.
P P
A number of ambulance men soon arrived at the Flat. They
detected no breathing or pulse in Jasper. They examined the
Q Q
defendant and found her breathing and had no observable
injuries. The defendant and Jasper were rushed to Pok Oi
R Hospital for medical treatment. R
On arrival at the Pok Oi Hospital at 9.22 pm, Jasper was in
S a coma with no breath, pulse or blood pressure. CPR and S
resuscitation were performed. Urgent blood testing showed
that the blood carboxyhaemoglobin level was at 77 per cent,
T T
well above the lethal level of 50 per cent, whereas the blood
oxyhaemoglobin level was only at 8 per cent, substantially
U below the normal level. Jasper failed to respond to U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 2 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
resuscitation and was certified dead at 10.19 pm on 28 May
2022.
B B
And now the treatment of the defendant. The defendant was
unconscious upon arrival at the Accident and Emergency
C C
Department of the Pok Oi Hospital. Both pupils were sluggish
in response, and her blood carboxyhaemoglobin level was 27.3
D per cent on arrival, which was above the toxic level of 20 D
per cent but below the lethal level of 50 per cent.
Meanwhile, her blood oxyhaemoglobin level was at 71.1 per
E cent, well below the normal level of 94 per cent to 97 per E
cent. Her condition was compatible with carbon monoxide
F
poisoning. She was transferred to the Intensive Care Unit of F
the Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital for further
management. There she received hyperbaric oxygen therapy on
G 29 and 30 May 2022. She was transferred back to the Pok Oi G
Hospital for treatment in the ICU on 30 May 2022.
H On 3 June 2022, the defendant was admitted to the Castle Peak H
Hospital and was provisionally diagnosed with depressive
I episode. She was given an antidepressant. She was later I
discharged from Castle Peak Hospital to attend court on 7
June 2022.
J J
During her remand at the Castle Peak Hospital from 3 to 7 June
2022, the defendant was examined by a psychiatrist, Dr
K Kimberly Yip. In her report, Dr Yip stated that the defendant K
was new to mental health services, and she had no reported
L family history of mental illness. The defendant also denied L
psychotic symptoms or history of being abused. Meanwhile,
the defendant reported a deterioration of mood in the past
M two years due to a number of stressors, including: M
(1) deteriorating marital relationship with Mr Hui;
N N
(2) health issues relating to Jasper, and
O O
(3) financial stress in that Mr Hui had accumulated a
credit card debt of some HK$30,000 to HK$40,000 in
P the past year. P
Harbouring fleeting suicidal ideas, the defendant bought a
Q Q
bag of charcoal in January 2022 and hid it in her closet.
She also purchased a bottle of hypnotics. One month prior to
R the incident, her mood further worsened due to her son’s R
health condition and the lack of support from Mr Hui. She,
however, largely maintained her sleep or appetite.
S S
Now the inquiries at the scene. The police conducted
inquiries inside the Flat and found, among other things, the
T T
following:
U U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 3 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
(a) a suicide note next to the couple’s bed in the
bedroom;
B B
(b) a blanket on the floor inside the bedroom next to
the door;
C C
(c) a pan of ashes on a portable gas stove in the living
D room just outside the bedroom; D
(d) the plastic curtain separating the living room and
E the balcony and the cat door were both sealed with E
adhesive tapes;
F F
(e) a bag of charcoal inside the kitchen;
G (f) a metal cup, a spoon and a syringe in the kitchen G
sink;
H (g) a bottle of “Natrol” Melatonin tablets with H
89 pills therein.
I I
The metal cup was found to contain about 100 millilitres of
a liquid containing Melatonin, which is a hypnotic, whereas
J the syringe contained traces of a liquid containing Melatonin J
and Ibuprofen. It is an anti-inflammatory medicine.
K Now the autopsy of Jasper. Autopsy was performed on Jasper K
by forensic pathologist Dr Tsang Chak-chi on 31 May 2022.
L Apart from cherry red hypostasis on the back of the body and L
a small abrasion on the right big toe, no recent external
injuries were found. Nor was there any obvious congenital
M deformity. M
Toxicological analysis of bodily samples taken from Jasper
N N
revealed that carboxyhaemoglobin was detected in the blood at
a level of 64 per cent saturation. Melatonin was detected in
O the blood at a level of 0.05 microgrammes per millilitre and O
in the stomach content.
P The autopsy revealed no natural disease that could account P
for the death of Jasper. Dr Tsang confirmed that:
Q Q
(1) the presence of carboxyhaemoglobin in the blood at
a level of 64 per cent was sufficient to be fatal;
R R
(2) carbon monoxide has a higher affinity to
haemoglobin than oxygen, causing tissue hypoxia,
S and it could directly cause cellular toxicity by S
inhibiting cytochrome oxidase that worsens hypoxia;
and
T T
U U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 4 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
(3) Melatonin is a dietary supplement for treating
sleep disorder and is also produced endogenously in
B humans. B
In view of those findings, Dr Tsang concluded that Jasper’s
C C
cause of death was carbon monoxide poisoning.
D Now the cautioned interview of the defendant. Following the D
defendant’s return to the Pok Oi Hospital on 30 May 2022, the
police approached her for inquiries on 1 June 2022. The
E officers conducted an interview with the defendant in Ward 7S. E
During the 45-minute video-recorded interview, the defendant
F
was arrested for the killing of Jasper. Under caution, she F
admitted that she had done so because she was unhappy at home.
G In her interview, the defendant made a full and detailed G
admission of the offence. She stated that Mr Hui had scolded
her in the evening of 27 May 2022 for massaging Jasper. She
H was unhappy and cried. As a result, she decided to commit H
suicide with Jasper by charcoal burning on the following day.
I I
In the morning on 28 May 2022, the defendant woke up at around
9 am and had breakfast. Sometime after 11 am, she used
J adhesive tapes to seal the curtain separating the living room J
and the balcony as well as the cat door. She wrote a suicide
note by copying a draft she had previously stored in her
K mobile phone. Later on, she grinded four sleeping pills, K
mixed the powder with water and fed them to Jasper with a
L syringe. She then took eight sleeping pills herself. After L
doing so, she set up the gas stove, burned the charcoal and
placed the stove inside the bedroom. She and Jasper fell
M asleep together. It was her intention to die with Jasper. M
The defendant admitted purchasing the bag of charcoal and
N N
liquefied gas cartridge in early 2022 with a view to commit
suicide. Mr Hui did not know about these items. When shown
O a bottle of Melatonin pills found in the kitchen, the O
defendant admitted purchasing it online in January 2022 for
consumption when burning charcoal. She fed four tablets to
P Jasper and consumed eight tablets herself. She had not P
consumed those pills previously.
Q Q
The defendant stated that she had harboured the idea of
committing suicide for over a year since 2021. She felt that
R she had been poorly treated by Mr Hui. When asked for R
specifics, the defendant identified two incidents. Firstly,
Mr Hui had once dragged her out of the bedroom following an
S argument over monetary affairs. He then forcefully pressed S
her down on a chair and refused to let her go. Secondly,
during an argument in 2021 over a possible divorce and a
T T
contest over custody of Jasper, Mr Hui grabbed hold of her
hand and tried to take Jasper away from her. She refused to
U let go and Mr Hui pressed on her hand forcefully. On the U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 5 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
impact on her as a result of her arguments with Mr Hui, the
defendant said that they had adversely affected her temper
B but denied being paranoid. She had never told anyone about B
her suicide plan and had never attempted suicide before.
C C
Now background inquiries on the defendant. Inquiries were
made with the defendant’s mother and social worker.
D D
Prior to the incident, the defendant had been complaining to
her mother about her arguments with Mr Hui, but the mother
E had no knowledge about the reason for the defendant’s suicide E
attempt. Meanwhile, the social worker confirmed that she had
F
met the defendant in person twice, in October 2021 and April F
2022 respectively. On both occasions, the defendant
discussed her marital problem and her argument with Mr Hui
G but made no mention of her suicidal thoughts or that she had G
been subjected to domestic violence.
H Now the defendant’s psychiatric condition. Prior to this H
offence, the defendant was not known to the public mental
I health system. Reports from two specialist psychiatrists I
have been obtained and they were placed before the court.
J The first one is a report from Dr Li Cheuk-wing, a specialist J
in psychiatry in private practice, dated 25 March 2024. In
preparing his report, Dr Li had interviewed the defendant at
K the Tai Lam Centre for Women for around two hours and 20 K
minutes on 27 February 2024.
L L
The second report is by Dr Dorothy Tang Yuen-yee, visiting
psychiatrist of the Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre, dated 23 July
M 2024. In compilation of her report, Dr Tang had repeatedly M
examined the defendant during the defendant’s remand at the
Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre.
N N
Both psychiatrists are of the opinion that at the time of the
O killing, the defendant suffered from Major Depressive O
Disorder in accordance with the Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition, called DSM-5. Her
P Major Depressive Disorder was classified as severe. Her P
symptoms included pervasive low mood, weight loss, poor sleep,
low energy level, feeling of worthlessness and recurrent
Q Q
suicidal ideation. She was then suffering from an abnormality
of mind arising from Major Depressive Disorder which had or
R had likely substantially impaired her ability to form rational R
judgment and exercise self-control.
S And before me, the defendant accepted and admitted that she S
had on 28 May 2022, in Hong Kong, unlawfully killed Jasper by
burning charcoal inside the Flat. She pleaded guilty to
T T
manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility in
satisfaction of the indictment for murder.
U U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 6 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
Now the background and mitigation. The defendant was born in
October 1979, so she is now 45 years of age. She had a clear
B record. Defence counsel, Miss Joyce Wu, in her written B
submission basically provided information on the defendant to
fill the gaps left out in the Admitted Facts.
C C
The defendant was said not to have a close relationship with
D her father who was strict or her mother or her sister when D
she was growing up. She did not do well academically but she
attended courses after she finished secondary school and
E obtained qualification to work as an accounts clerk. The E
defendant had a couple of failed romances before she met
F
Mr Hui. She was very happy when she got married with Mr Hui F
in Okinawa, with the ceremony attended by family and friends.
G Shortly after the wedding, the defendant fell pregnant. G
Mr Hui, who was then a divorcee and already had a daughter
with his ex-wife, was not keen to start a family with the
H defendant even though he and the defendant had discussed about H
this and he had agreed. He then even asked the defendant to
I have an abortion which the defendant refused. Mr Hui was not I
supportive throughout the defendant’s pregnancy and did not
accompany her to antenatal appointments. He also threw
J tantrums and shouted at the defendant over trivial matters. J
After Jasper was born, Jasper was found to have something
K wrong with his skull. He also suffered from torticollis, K
meaning that his little head leaned to one side. The
L defendant was very worried about it and she was required to L
take Jasper for physiotherapy on a regular basis. Mr Hui did
not accompany her to take Jasper to those appointments. The
M defendant was advised by the physiotherapist to massage little M
Jasper’s neck twice every day but the poor baby screamed and
cried when she did so. Mr Hui did not help with the massage
N N
but told defendant to stop doing so, saying that it was of no
use. According to the defendant, Mr Hui did not help to take
O care of Jasper either. When Mr Hui was at home on leave, he O
played games with his mobile phone or the two cats they kept
at home.
P P
The relationship between the defendant and Mr Hui had gotten
worse. Apart from the discord over Jasper’s condition, the
Q Q
defendant also found out that Mr Hui owed several ten thousand
credit card debts. Not only that Mr Hui did not give the
R defendant any emotional support, he did not give her financial R
support either. As the defendant stopped working after Jasper
was born, she was using her own savings for household expenses
S and buying things for Jasper. She worried about her own S
financial position. She was tearful when she was with Mr
Hui.
T T
Jasper was born at the time when the COVID-19 pandemic was
U rife. Mr Hui forbade the defendant to take Jasper out. The U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 7 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
defendant could only secretly take Jasper out to attend church
or see her family when Mr Hui was at work, and she had to be
B back home before Mr Hui returned home. The defendant felt B
suffocated, helpless, lonely, exhausted and melancholy. She
did not realise that her mental health was deteriorating and
C C
that she suffered from Major Depressive Disorder. As
disclosed in the Admitted Facts, the defendant sought help
D from a social worker. However, Mr Hui put the blame on the D
defendant, and the family problem could not be resolved.
There had been occasions when Mr Hui was physically aggressive
E to the defendant. E
F
When the defendant suggested divorce, Mr Hui threatened to F
take custody of Jasper. The defendant felt imprisoned in an
unhappy marriage with no way out. She felt unloved and
G useless, and she harboured suicidal ideas. She bought G
charcoal and ordered hypnotic pills online in case she wanted
to kill herself. However, the idea of suicide soon subsided.
H H
On the evening before the offence, defendant was told off by
I Mr Hui when she massaged Jasper’s shoulder in accordance with I
the advice from the physiotherapist. She became upset and
cried. She decided to commit suicide with burning charcoal
J and taking Jasper with her. The defendant was worried that J
Mr Hui would not take care of Jasper after she was gone, and
Mr Hui had never shown any interest in Jasper, just like he
K showed no interest in the daughter he had with his ex-wife. K
In the defendant’s warped mind, she thought Jasper would be
L better off with her in heaven, and she proceeded to commit L
suicide and to kill Jasper at the same time by burning
charcoal in the bedroom of the Flat as outlined in the
M Admitted Facts. M
The defendant was utterly upset when she found out that she
N N
did not die but her beloved son Jasper had died. It was not
known at the time of the offence that the defendant was
O suffering from a severe case of Major Depressive Disorder. O
Miss Wu submitted that the defendant’s condition had since
improved. The defendant had since divorced Mr Hui. Her
P relationship with her parents and her sister had improved. P
From being introverted and feeling small and useless, she had
become active and sociable. She engaged herself fervently
Q Q
with matters concerning her Christian faith, and she gained
the trust and support from people working for the church,
R Christian organisation and inmates. These people, together R
with the defendant’s family members and friends, wrote to
this Court, asking for leniency on behalf of the defendant.
S S
Miss Wu referred to the cases submitted by the prosecution,
to which I will refer later, and submitted that the
T T
circumstances of the present case is not as serious as those
submitted. Miss Wu particularly emphasised the change in the
U defendant since her remand and the discovery of her mental U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 8 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
illness. The defendant had shown great improvement in her
social skill and ability. The defendant has unwavering
B support from her family and the church. Not only that she B
continued to further her studies to equip herself, she also
encouraged her fellow inmates to do so. As I have mentioned,
C C
her fellow inmates also wrote to this Court, seeking leniency
on the defendant’s behalf.
D D
Miss Wu also placed emphasis on the fact that the defendant
had been in custody for three years which, it is submitted,
E is equivalent to a sentence of 4½ years after remission, E
meaning a starting point of 6¾ years. Miss Wu asked this
F
Court to exercise compassion and consider imposing a Probation F
Order. I decided to call for a Probation Officer’s report
and an up-to-date psychiatric report on the defendant prior
G to sentence. G
Now the Probation Officer’s report. The probation officer,
H Ms Chu, after giving me a very detailed report on the H
defendant and her relationship with various people, in
I particular Mr Hui and Jasper, prior to the killing, I
recommended that provided the defendant is considered
suitable for outpatient psychiatric treatment, a 12-month
J Probation Order with special condition that the defendant J
shall receive psychiatric and/or psychological treatment as
directed by the PO.
K K
The further up-to-date psychiatric reports. I have up-to-
L date psychiatric reports from two psychiatrists, L
Dr Dorothy Tang and Dr Kimberly Yip. I do not think there is
any need to repeat the background and the diagnosis mentioned
M in the reports. Both doctors recommended a Hospital Order of M
9 months to be served in Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre followed
by inpatient psychiatric rehabilitation and psychological
N N
input focusing on her emotion regulation and stress coping at
Castle Peak Hospital upon the expiration of her sentence.
O O
Bearing in mind the defendant was admitted into the Siu Lam
Psychiatric Centre on 7 June 2022 and was transferred to
P Tai Lam Correctional Institute for Women in April 2023, P
indicating on the face of it that the defendant was not
receiving inpatient treatment in the Correctional Services
Q Q
Department, I asked for further psychiatric report to clarify
this.
R On the adjourned hearing on 24 June 2025, which is today, I R
had the further reports by both Dr Kimberly Yip and Dr Dorothy
Tang. I do not think there is any need to go into details of
S these reports. Suffice it to say that both doctors had given S
me sufficient explanation why there is still a need for the
defendant to receive inpatient treatment. Just to mention it
T T
briefly, while the defendant’s symptoms had been well
controlled with pharmacological treatment, symptoms control
U is often the first stage of treatment to be followed by U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 9 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
consolidation of her improvement and relapse prevention.
Thorough rehabilitation programme is difficult to conduct
B during the remand period as the defendant would be preoccupied B
with the legal proceedings and outcome of the case.
C C
So in view of the gravity of the offence and the high suicide
and violence risks associated with the defendant’s severe
D Major Depressive Disorder, a Hospital Order for 9 months is D
recommended. I should mention here that through her counsel,
the defendant asked to be sent to Castle Peak Hospital to
E serve the Hospital Order if the court so ordered. I E
understand from both doctors that a Hospital Order will be
F
served at the Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre under the F
Correctional Services Department. That will be the first
stage of rehabilitation focusing upon various treatments.
G G
Upon expiry of the Hospital Order, the defendant will be
transferred to the Castle Peak Hospital for the second stage,
H which focuses on community integration. Both Dr Tang and Dr H
Yip will continue to be the defendant’s psychiatrists, whether
I at the Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre or at the Castle Peak I
Hospital.
J Now, I will mention the authorities. Mr Lui for the J
prosecution very helpfully referred me to five cases. All
involved defendants facing murder charges be eventually found
K guilty of manslaughter on the basis of diminished K
responsibility, either by the defendant pleading guilty to
L such, or being accepted by the prosecution, or by the Court L
of Appeal quashing the verdict of murder and substituting it
with manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility.
M M
Now, the first case is R v Lee Sau Ping, CACC 189/1995. This
is a case decided in 1995 on appeal. The defendant killed
N N
her five-year-old daughter and was charged with murder. She
was sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment. Her application for
O leave to appeal against sentence was dismissed. The facts O
disclosed that the defendant had previously abused the victim,
and the victim was under the care of Po Leung Kuk. The
P defendant took the victim out from Po Leung Kuk and reported P
her being taken to the Mainland by her friend. A report was
made to the police. The victim was found nine days later,
Q Q
dead inside a nylon bag near a pier. Defendant admitted she
had put the victim inside the bag and dumped her into the sea
R to drown her. There was no dispute that the defendant had R
planned this for a few days.
S The Court of Appeal said that there was a wide range of S
sentence from probation to life imprisonment. The Court of
Appeal did not think the sentence of 10 years was manifestly
T T
excessive and refused leave.
U U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 10 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
The second case is HKSAR v Chan Ka Fai, CACC 100/2008. This
case involved a defendant stabbing his mother to death. He
B then tried to commit suicide by cutting his own left wrist B
after leaving a suicide note. The defendant lost his job two
months before the killing and pretended to go to work every
C C
day. He was $400,000 in debt and had spent the $600,000 the
family received following the death of his father in a work-
D related accident two years earlier. D
The defendant claimed that after he had told his mother the
E truth, she kept scolding him, which made him annoyed and E
confused. He therefore went to the kitchen and fetched a
F
knife to slash her neck. After she fell onto the sofa, the F
defendant stabbed her indiscriminately and suffocated her
with a cushion. After moving the body to the bedroom and
G tidying up the scene, he wrote a suicide note and attempted G
to kill himself. He was sentenced to 8 years’ imprisonment.
Leave to appeal against sentence was refused.
H H
The third case is HKSAR v Chiu Wai Kan Vicken (No. 2) [2011]
I 5 HKLRD 422. The defendant killed his 75-year-old stepfather. I
At the time of the killing, the defendant was under the
influence of drug-induced psychosis which was self-induced as
J the defendant had started abusing ketamine since the age of J
16. The killing was committed when the defendant was 23.
The defendant was sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment by the
K Court of Appeal when his verdict of murder was quashed and K
substituted by manslaughter by reason of diminished
L responsibility. L
The fourth case is Secretary for Justice v Chan Man Yum Candy
M [2011] 5 HKC 72. This is in fact a case I did. The respondent M
pleaded guilty to manslaughter after killing her 13-month-old
adopted daughter. She was sentenced to 3 years’ probation.
N N
The Secretary for Justice applied for a review of sentence.
O The facts disclosed that the respondent adopted the child O
from a Mainland orphanage. First, the defendant hired a
domestic helper to look after the baby. She later had to
P look after the baby herself after she sacked the first helper P
and then a second helper. The baby had trouble keeping food
down and often cried. The respondent was under stress as her
Q Q
savings were reduced due to the economic situation in 2008.
Her family was concerned about her mental health. The
R respondent sought help and had an appointment with a R
psychiatrist, but the baby was killed before she had the
appointment.
S S
On the day in question, she was exhausted after seeking a
repayment of a loan in the Mainland. She returned to Hong
T T
Kong and picked up the baby from her mother and had an argument
with her mother over the feeding of the baby. The baby was
U in distress when the respondent took her home. A neighbour U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 11 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
saw the respondent repeatedly holding the baby upside down
and throwing her on the ground. The neighbour then saw the
B respondent trying to revive the baby. Within 18 minutes of B
the first abuse, the respondent took the baby to the hospital.
The baby died five days later when the life support machine
C C
was turned off.
D Autopsy showed four fractures of the skull and other injuries. D
There was no indication of previous abuse to the child. The
respondent was subsequently diagnosed as suffering from
E bipolar affective disorder. She was sent to Siu Lam E
Psychiatric Centre. While on remand, the respondent was seen
F
by another psychiatrist who said the offence could be the F
result of extreme frustration and impairment of impulse
control caused by manic symptoms.
G G
The trial judge took full cognisance of the nature of the
violent act and said if the respondent had not been suffering
H from mental illness at the time of the death, a heavy sentence H
would have been imposed. The trial judge recognised there
I were special circumstances and took into account that the I
respondent had done a lot of charity work and made the
probation order. The court heard that the condition of the
J respondent was under control through medication and she had J
complied with the terms of the Probation Order.
K The Court of Appeal dismissed the application, saying, among K
other things, that it is open to a judge to impose a sentence
L on an offender in the position of the respondent other than L
a sentence of imprisonment.
M The last authority is HKSAR v Lee Fung Yee [2011] 5 HKLRD M
351. In that case, the defendant killed her 15-year-old son
and 13-year-old daughter. She was charged with murder. Her
N N
plea of guilty to manslaughter was rejected by the
prosecution. After trial, she was convicted of manslaughter
O by reason of diminished responsibility and sentenced to O
7 years’ imprisonment. On appeal, her sentence was reduced
to one of 4 years. The facts disclosed that the defendant
P met a Taoist priest. We will just call him “H”. She claimed P
to believe H was a god, H took her virginity and used her for
his sexual gratification. She has three children with H,
Q Q
including the two victims.
R When the defendant learned that H had other women, she decided R
to kill herself and the victims as she did not want to leave
them behind. She laced orange juice with sleeping pills
S before burning charcoal in the room. When firemen and police S
came as a result of report made by the caretaker, the
defendant told them she was burning incense and prevented
T T
them from searching the bedroom, saying the victims were
sleeping. She then turned off the phone and went to sleep.
U U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 12 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
When she woke up, she found the two victims dead. Police was
alerted.
B B
At trial, the defendant claimed to be under H’s complete
control and killed the victims in a weakened mental state
C C
after argument with H over other women. The jury accepted
the opinion of a psychiatrist on the defendant and unanimously
D returned a manslaughter verdict. D
The Court of Appeal said, among other things, that protection
E of human life was the foremost objective of our system of E
criminal justice. The community was entitled to expect that
F
the unlawful taking of a life be denounced by a punishment F
that was appropriate to the circumstances. The defendant
bore a high degree of responsibility. The killing was not
G done on the spur of the moment but was carefully planned. G
Parents have no right to decide whether their children should
live or not.
H H
Having regard to the opinion of the psychiatrist, a 7-year
I imprisonment was manifestly excessive. The Court of Appeal I
adopted a starting point of 6 years and reduced it to 4 as
the defendant always intended to plead guilty and did plead
J guilty to manslaughter. J
Of these five authorities, only three concern the killing of
K one’s own child, natural or adopted. I do not find the other K
two authorities particularly helpful. In my view, the
L circumstances of killing in the last case - that is the L
Lee Fung Yee case - were similar to the present one: plan to
kill the victims when the defendant planned to commit suicide;
M administer sleeping pill to victim first, and then burn M
charcoal to kill by the inhalation of carbon monoxide. The
reason triggering the defendant, Lee Fung-yee, and this
N N
defendant to commit suicide and kill the offspring was not
the same but both defendants felt helplessness in their
O situation and were both affected by their mental illness. O
In the present case, while the suicide and killing was
P planned, there was no deliberate act to prevent law P
enforcement officer or fireman from intervening. So I am of
the view that comparatively speaking, the culpability of this
Q Q
defendant, when compared with Lee Yung Yee, was less in scale.
R Having considered all the circumstances of the offence and R
the defendant’s background, including her mental condition at
the time of the offence and her present mental condition, but
S for the fact that two psychiatrists are still of the view S
that the defendant needs inpatient treatment for her mental
illness and is not ready to be released into the society, I
T T
would have considered sentencing the defendant by placing her
on probation with special condition as suggested by the PO,
U U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 13 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V
A A
particularly bearing in mind the period the defendant had
already been in custody. That is 3 years.
B B
However, as the defendant is still in need of inpatient
psychiatric treatment, I accept the recommendation of the two
C C
psychiatrists and order the defendant to a Hospital Order for
9 months under section 45 of the Mental Health Ordinance.
D D
So I will pass the actual sentence. Can you stand up, please,
defendant? So for the offence of manslaughter, the defendant
E is sentenced to a Hospital Order for 9 months under section E
45 of the Mental Health Ordinance.
F F
G G
I/we certify that to the best of my/our ability
and skill, the foregoing is a true transcript of
the audio recording of the above proceedings
H H
I I
.........................................
Christine Pagey
Date: 7 July 2025
J J
K K
L L
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
CRT22/24.6.2025/CP 14 HCCC 341/2024(1)/Sentence
V V