Read the full judgment text of DCCC 378/2014 on BabelCite. This District Court judgment.
1. The Defendants (D1 to D3 on the indictment and so termed throughout) were each charged with offences of dealing with property known or believed to represent proceeds of an indictable offence, contrary to Sections 25(1) and (3) of the Organized and Serious Crimes Ordinance, Cap. 455. D1 denied Counts 1 to 3 on the indictment but was convicted after trial in respect of Counts 2 and 3, but acquitted of Count 1, while D2 admitted Count 4 on the indictment and D3 Count 5 on the indictment from the
Cites 3 cases