Stun gun attacker jailed for 2 years
A jobless man who attacked two bus passengers with a stun gun was jailed for two years yesterday.
Tong So-keung, 39, boarded a Citybus on January 10 and sat on the upper deck a few rows behind a 35-year-old woman. When the bus reached Cheung Sha Wan Road, the woman felt a pain in her right ear and turned to see Tong pointing an electrical object at her - later identified as a stun gun.
The woman shouted for help and struggled. Tong tried to cover her mouth with his hand and another passenger who witnessed the incident yelled at him.
Tong fled downstairs and asked the driver to open the door and let him off. When the driver refused, Tong thrust the gun in his face. The two struggled when Tong prepared to attack the driver again, and Tong then managed to escape.
Tong, 39, pleaded guilty to two counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and one count of possession of arms without a licence.
Deputy District Judge Rickie Chan Kam-cheong said the case involved three serious offences and the use of the stun gun had made the two assault charges more serious. He said 'stun guns are dangerous weapons and they could inflict serious injuries on people'.
Both victims needed hospital treatment. The woman suffered an abrasion on her neck, and a 1cm cut behind her right ear.
The bus driver was left with a 2.5cm red mark on his left ear.
Under police caution, Tong said he had attacked the bus passengers to test his stun gun, which he had bought a year earlier. But in a second recorded interview, he admitted he planned to use it on a robbery.
Earlier, in mitigation, the court heard that Tong's garments business closed in 2003 and he had since suffered financial hardship. He said he originally bought the stun gun for fun but later intended to use it to commit robbery.
Counsel for Tong, Alexis Lee, said his client did not intend to commit a robbery on the bus that day. Judge Chan rejected this claim, as the evidence suggested Tong was intending to carry out a robbery rather than simply test the gun.
He had also considered the two victims were attacked without any provocation, and therefore a custodial sentence was essential.