Summary

HKSAR V LAM WAI SAI AND OTHERS (2011)

It cannot excuse a participant’s actions to claim later, in what might be termed “pseudo mitigation”, that he or she did not know the nature or strength of the substance, were unaware of the purpose of the attack or the status of the victim, and did not receive the promised payment.
Further, it is a matter of chance whether the injuries to the victim are severe with lasting physical or mental damage, or whether there has been a full and quick recovery of the victim. It is not the result of any act of virtue by a perpetrator.
Source: Wikisource

HKSAR V LAM WAI SAI AND OTHERS (2011)

There are three general scenarios for this type of offence. One is the result of a love triangle, where the spurned spouse or partner wreaks revenge on the person who is perceived as being the cause of, or the reason for, the breakdown of a relationship or the loss of consortium. The aim of the perpetrator is both punishment for the emotional damage and to ensure that the victim will not offend again in the same manner, usually by ensuring that the victim is disfigured or incapacitated.
Source: Wikisource

HKSAR V LAM WAI SAI AND OTHERS (2011)

In each case, the factual scenario will vary greatly as to the nature of the attack, the motive for the attack, the spontaneity of, or the degree of planning for, the attack, whether there was a real and specific intention to cause injury, and other individual features which may bear on the culpability of the offender or offenders.
In the present case, the victim was targeted because of his employment as a prosecutor against a person who was effectively an inspiration and guiding light for the attack.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature