Read the full judgment text of DCCC 58/2017 on BabelCite. This District Court judgment was delivered on 13 July 2017.
1. D1 to D3 were all involved in a pro-longed fraud case involving internet transactions. D1 and D3 were first jointly charged with one count of “Fraud”, contrary to section 16A(1) of the Theft Ordinance, Cap 210 (Charge 1) whereas D1 to D3 was separately and individually charged with another count of “Dealing with property known or believed to represent proceeds of indictable offence”, contrary to section 25(1) and (3) of the Organized and Serious Crimes Ordinance, Cap 455 (Charges 2 – 4). Al
Cites 1 case