1
<
"Diminished responsibility" was not an issue as there was
was suffering from the type of
no medical evidence that
abnormality of mind referred to in section 3 of the Homicide Ordinance.
There was,
however, evidence that his mind began to drift from its "norm" from the moment he realised, on the night before the tragedy,
that
had pledged herself to another. His restlessness
then, his insomnia during the night, his suicidal thoughts in the
early moring followed by his bizarre behaviour before, during and after the fatal stabbing could well have been symptomatic of a "breaking down of his nervous system". Although the prosecution
theory, at the outset of the trial, was that the killing was
premeditated that theory was not consistent with the evidence
subsequently given at the trial. It was not a premeditated killing.
The fatal stab wounds were inflicted during an impulsive, frenzied
attack by a young man with no previous history of violent
behaviour and with no previous record of anti-social behaviour at
all. Although diminished responsibility was never an issue the
evidence does nevertheless point to an abnormality of mind which,
on a merciful view of his conduct, mitigates its criminality.
Should Your Excellency consider that the circumstances
justify the exercise of your prerogative of mercy I would recommend
that the sentence be commuted to imprisonment for a finite term within the range of 15 to 20 years.
i
I have the honour to be,
Sir,
Your Excellency's obedient servant,
1
(E.C. Barnes) Judge of the High Court
*
7