By Paul Gregoire and Ugur Nedim
On the evening of 6 September 2014, Zhen Fang stabbed his friend Ting Huang to death, in a frenzied attack whereby he inflicted 20 wounds to the victim’s head, neck, trunk and upper extremities.
The two work colleagues had been drinking beer and smoking a substantial amount of ice at the residence of Jian Feng Weng. The house, situated on Kennedy Street in Guildford, operates as a Buddhist Temple and was the site of another murder in April this year.
On the night of the 2014 murder, Mr Weng overheard Fang say to Mr Huang, “Why did you threaten me?” Mr Weng retired to bed and, when he awoke on the following morning, he found the two men were no longer at his house.
Mr Fang claimed Mr Huang had threatened to kill his family on the night of the attack. During his subsequent trial, three psychiatrists expressed the opinion the offender was experiencing a drug-induced psychosis at the time of the killing.
NSW Supreme Court Justice Johnson was unable to “make a finding either way” as to whether Mr Huang had actually made a threat, or whether Mr Fang “was subject to a delusion that there was a threat.”
Released after confessing to murder
After stabbing Mr Huang to death, Fang wrapped his victim’s body in a Chanel quilt and placed it in the boot of Huang’s green Honda sedan. Mr Fang then drove the vehicle to East Street in Lidcombe, parked next it next to Rookwood Cemetery and left it there.
On 10 September, Fang attended Padstow Chinese Congregational Church, where he was a member of the congregation. He confessed to the pastor that he had done something wrong to a person, accompanying his words with a throat slitting gesture. The pastor advised him to go to the police.
Mr Fang formally confessed at Campsie police station the following day. He told Detective Sergeant Johnson that he “had killed someone,” and he’d been given “a lot of ice.” The offender said he could not remember his victim’s name, but recalled the man had threatened his family.
The officers became concerned about Fang’s mental health and arranged for an ambulance to take him to St George Hospital, where staff formed the opinion that he was not suffering a mental illness or disorder, and subsequently released him.
Arrested on arrival
Twelve days after the killing, on 18 September, Mr Fang flew to China on a return ticket to see his ailing mother. Whilst Fang was abroad, police located Mr Huang’s body in the boot of the car, after the vehicle was reported as abandoned.
Investigating police turned to the statement Mr Fang had provided at the station. They then contacted Fang in China, and the suspect agreed to return to Sydney on his scheduled return flight.
On arrival at Sydney airport, Mr Fang was arrested and taken to Mascot police station, where he provided police with a DNA sample. A covertly recorded conversation suggested Fang told his family members that “a bad man” had threatened to kill them.
Trial for murder
On 23 November last year, a jury found Mr Fang guilty of murder in the NSW Supreme Court under section 18 of the Crimes Act 1900. Section 19A of the Act provides that “person who commits the crime of murder is liable to” life imprisonment.
The offence of murder also carries a standard non-parole period (SNPP) of 20 years. An SNPP is a reference point for the sentencing judge when determining the minimum time a person must spend behind bars, before being eligible to apply for release on parole.
During the trial, evidence was adduced that Mr Fang had been using ice for 12 months leading up to the incident, and had no personal or family history of mental illness. However, Fang did have a criminal history that suggested he had experienced issues with excessive alcohol use.
The court found that the defence of mental illness was not established, as “in the absence of evidence of any psychiatric condition, the existence of a drug induced psychosis did not constitute a ‘disease of the mind.’”
The jury also rejected the partial defence of substantial impairment. Section 23A of the Crimes Act provides a partial defence to murder, if an “underlying condition” has substantially impaired the accused’s capacity to understand events, make correct judgements or control themselves. This defence can reduce murder to manslaughter.
However, the jury found Mr Fang’s culpability was not reduced due to his intoxication, after the judge gave directions that subsection 23A(3) provides that the effects of “self-induced intoxication are to be disregarded,” when determining whether culpability is reduced.
The sentencing
On 31 March this year, Justice Johnson handed down Mr Fang’s sentence.
The judge found that Fang’s drug induced psychosis did not reduce the severity of his sentence, noting that section 21A(5AA) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 states that “the self-induced intoxication of the offender” is not to be taken into account as a mitigating factor.
His Honour did find that Mr Fang had no prior knowledge that his use of ice would lead “to an act of violence on his part towards another person,” although he was aware that the drug had led to behavioural changes. But this did not mitigate his culpability.
The judge noted that Fang had shown contrition and remorse, and had good prospects for rehabilitation. However, His Honour also found that general deterrence was a primary consideration in determining the ultimate sentence.
As Mr Fang was convicted on a “serious violence offence,” His Honour said he should be warned of the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006, which provides for extended supervision and continuing detention of the most dangerous offenders.
He sentenced Mr Fang to 19 years imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 14 years.
