判決理由書／裁決書撮要(由AI生成)
以下撮要以AI生成及／或翻譯，內容以原來的判決理由書／裁決書為準。
The judgment states that the Defendant, a 31-year-old university-educated unemployed man with a clear record and a past mood disorder, pleaded guilty before the Court of First Instance to one count of wounding with intent (as an alternative to attempted murder) under section 17(a) of the Offences against the Person Ordinance and one count of wounding under section 19 of the same Ordinance. The offences arose from a knife attack on a public figure distributing leaflets at an election campaign booth on a busy pavement during rush hour on 6 November 2019. The Defendant had made repeated reconnaissance visits on 4 and 5 November, obtained flowers to gain the victim’s trust, then used a 33-centimetre knife to stab the victim in the chest and, when confronted by the victim’s bodyguard, held on to the weapon and inflicted further chest and arm injuries. CCTV and video footage corroborated the events. On arrest the Defendant was found with a second knife in his shoulder bag. He was sentenced by the trial judge to nine years’ imprisonment for the wounding with intent offence and twenty-seven months’ imprisonment for the lesser wounding count, to run concurrently. His application for leave to appeal against these sentences was refused.
The Judge relied on established principles that the gravamen of wounding with intent is the offender’s deliberate intention to inflict really serious bodily harm, warranting sentences commensurate with that intent even if actual injuries are less severe due to victim resistance or prompt medical attention. The typical sentencing range for such offences lies between three and twelve years’ imprisonment, although life imprisonment is the statutory maximum, and each case must be assessed on its own facts with due regard to aggravating and mitigating factors.
The Judge identified multiple aggravating features: meticulous premeditation demonstrated by prior reconnaissance visits; the use of two knives including a 20-centimetre blade targeting the chest area with potentially fatal consequences; complete absence of provocation; deliberate distraction using flowers; and persistence in wielding the knife when subduing the bodyguard, causing additional injuries. The lesser severity of actual harm was regarded as purely fortuitous. In light of these factors, a strong general deterrent sentence was deemed necessary.
The Judge concluded that the seriousness of the Defendant’s intent and the marked aggravating circumstances justified a starting point at the top of the usual sentencing range. A one-quarter reduction was applied for the guilty plea, resulting in nine years’ imprisonment for the wounding with intent count. The concurrent lesser sentence for wounding reflected the same approach to proportionality and deterrence.
The Defendant received concurrent sentences of nine years’ imprisonment for the wounding with intent offence and twenty-seven months’ imprisonment for the wounding offence, these terms to run together and yielding a total effective sentence of nine years’ imprisonment from the date of custody pending appeal.
查看完整判決理由書／裁決書