Elderly woman wins appeal over neighbor dispute involving incense smoke and alleged push

A 72-year-old woman previously convicted of causing grievous bodily harm during a dispute with her neighbor over burning incense has had her conviction overturned and her prison sentence quashed by the High Court.

Dispute over smoke leads to legal battle

The incident occurred in March 2022 at Heng On Estate, involving two women in their seventies.

The conflict began when the appellant confronted her neighbor, who was burning incense and candles outside her door.

Expressing frustration over the thick smoke and environmental concerns, the appellant faced a verbal retaliation from the neighbor, who allegedly invoked divine retribution and pushed the appellant’s shoulder.

While the lower court originally sentenced the woman to one month in prison for pushing the neighbor back—causing her to fall and suffer a head injury—a High Court judge, Edmond Lee Chun-man, has now ruled that the original verdict failed to account for the physical realities of the confrontation.

Natural reaction in adverse conditions

In the written judgment, the presiding judge found several flaws in the original trial's conclusions.

The judge noted it was highly probable that the neighbor had been emotionally agitated and moved toward the appellant during the heated exchange.

Crucially, the evidence suggested that the appellant had only used one hand to push the neighbor's shoulder with moderate force.

Given that both women were over 70 years old, that the neighbor had just stood up from a squatting position, and that the floor was damp at the time, the judge ruled that the fall could have been caused by a combination of the neighbor tripping and the slippery environment rather than a violent assault.

Lack of malicious intent results in acquittal

The judge concluded that the push might have been a natural, reflexive response for self-protection after being pushed first.

There was insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the appellant acted with malicious intent or used excessive force to cause serious injury.

Consequently, the court ruled the appeal successful, setting aside the conviction and the one-month jail term.

𝗗𝗼𝘄𝗻𝗹𝗼𝗮𝗱 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗔𝗽𝗽 ↓