R. v. Li on

CACC000228/1994

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1994, No. 228
(Criminal)

____________

Coram : Yang, C.J., Power, V.-P. and Mortimer, J.A.

date of Judgment : 29 June 1995

_________________

J U D G M E N T

_________________

Mortimer, J.A. (giving the judgment of the Court) :

1. The applicant applies for leave to appeal against his conviction. He was convicted after trial before His Honour Judge Caird in the District Court of one offence of claiming to be a member of a triad society; three offences of blackmail and two offences of theft on 7 April 1994. On 22 April 1994 he was sentenced to a total of 4 years and 3 months imprisonment.

The facts

2. Mr Lee met his girlfriend, Miss Chan, in February 1993. She previously had a boyfriend. Lee met the applicant in the early hours of 6 March. Miss Chan had met the applicant earlier. The applicant went with the three of them and said that Chan's former boyfriend might beat Lee and asked him for $5,400 as a "separation fee", claiming to be a member of Wo Shing Wo triad society. That was the first offence.

3. Lee was frightened and went to his mother, making up a story. He obtained that money from his mother. He handed it over to the applicant. The threats made to obtain the money was count 2. The handing over of money count 3.

4. After the money had been handed over, Lee and Chan together with the applicant and a number of others went to a restaurant. After a phone call, the applicant said that the former boyfriend would not accept that amount of money and now wanted $54,000; and if the money was not paid, the girl would have to start working as a prostitute that night. Afraid of what might happen, they returned to Lee's mother. Again, stories were made up and on this occasion the applicant also went to see the mother. Threats were made to her about what would happen to the flat. She signed a cheque for $54,000 which was later cashed. The threat to obtain the cheque is the blackmail (Charge 4) and the obtaining of the money is the theft (Charge 5).

5. The applicant kept the original $5,400. Lee was told to contact the applicant later in the day. He tried but failed. The next time they all met was on 20 March. On that occasion, the applicant, the former boyfriend and another, put Lee and Chan into a car. They were driven to a hut on a hillside near the Shing Mun Reservoir. On the pretext that Lee had not contacted him as requested, the applicant told them that the $54,000 already paid was "regarded as void". A number of choices were given to Lee and Chan, to pay a further $54,000; or to suffer a report to the police because the girl was a missing person; or that Chan should start working as a prostitute that night; or that she should return to the original boyfriend. In fact, the party all went back to the mother to obtain another $54,000. On this occasion she reported the matter to the police and the applicant was arrested.

At trial

6. Evidence was given by Lee, Chan and the mother. The applicant was picked out on an identification parade. At trial, having expressed the view that he did not want a lawyer, he chose to defend himself. He impressed the judge by his grasp of the proceedings and at the end of the case, although he did not give evidence, he addressed the judge on his case for an hour.

Conclusion

7. There were some discrepancies in the evidence of the witnesses. The judge considered those but in the end, this was a very serious case, the evidence of each offence was overwhelming and the judge convicted. There is no basis for this application. The application is refused.

Representation:

Applicant in person

Mr Andrew Bruce, SACP (Crown Counsel) for Crown/Respondent