A Hong Kong construction worker, Chao Chung-yuen, 63, was sentenced to 10 years in prison on November 21, 2025, after a High Court jury unanimously convicted him of manslaughter for the 2022 fatal stabbing of his friend, Hui Man-tat, during a dispute over unpaid debt at the defendant’s residential flat in Choi Hung Estate. While originally facing a murder charge, the jury found Chao guilty of manslaughter by an unlawful and dangerous act, determining that the killing was not premeditated but resulted from a fit of temper during the argument.
Manslaughter Verdict Follows Debt Dispute
The tragic incident occurred on February 11, 2022, at Flat 217 of Hung Ngok House in Choi Hung Estate, Wong Tai Sin. Court testimony during the trial revealed that Hui had visited Chao’s home before the argument escalated. Evidence presented contradicted the defense’s initial claims that the stabbing was accidental or occurred while the deceased was charging at Chao.
The court ultimately determined that the most credible sequence of events was that Chao and Hui argued over an outstanding debt. In the heat of the moment, Chao armed himself with a meat cleaver and forcefully plunged the weapon into Hui’s right chest, inflicting the fatal wound.
Following the stabbing, at approximately 5 p.m., Chao contacted police through the 999 emergency line, initially reporting an accidental injury. When first responders arrived, Hui was discovered without a pulse or respiration. While being transported to the hospital, Chao told police that his friend, who had visited to assist with electrical and plumbing work, had been injured accidentally during the task. Hui was officially pronounced dead shortly after 6 p.m. that evening.
Court Dismisses Claims of Benevolence and Drug Concerns
During sentencing, the presiding judge rejected several mitigating factors presented by the defense. The defense attempted to portray Chao as a charitable individual who regularly extended money to friends in need. However, the court examined WhatsApp messages exchanged between Chao and the deceased which demonstrated that the loans were advanced with interest, undermining the claim that they constituted altruistic acts of charity.
Furthermore, the defense claimed that the stabbing occurred amid Chao’s profound concern over methamphetamine smoke, allegedly affecting his then 11-year-old son. This claim was dismissed by the judge, who noted that the presence of drug-taking paraphernalia found within the home significantly contradicted that defense theory.
Implications of Sentencing
The jury was composed of four women and three men who acquitted Chao of murder, accepting the argument that the action lacked the necessary intent for murder but clearly met the criteria for manslaughter.
In determining the 10-year prison sentence, the judge found no compelling mitigating circumstances, except for Chao’s initial willingness to plead guilty to manslaughter, though this offer was initially refused by the prosecution. This case underscores the serious and permanent consequences of escalating personal disputes, particularly those involving financial debt and access to lethal weapons. The conviction serves as a stark reminder of the legal accountability for unlawful acts resulting in death, even if not premeditated.