Yuen Chun-shing (on Bail) v. The Queen

CACC000242/1976

Coram: Briggs, C.J.

Date of Judgment: 3rd April, 1976.

-----------------

JUDGMENT

-----------------

1. The appellant was found guilty of being a member of a triad society contrary to section 20(2) of the Societies Ordinance. He appealed against that conviction before sentence was passed on him.

2. The only evidence adduced by the prosecution was a statement made by the appellant to a police officer. This, in the clearest possible manner, was an admission that he was a member of a triad society. The prosecution called the police constable who put the statement in evidence. At that point the magistrate held that there was a case to answer. This ruling was made before the appellant had been given the opportunity of giving evidence as to the admissibility of the statement. So, in effect, the magistrate held that the statement was admissible without hearing any evidence to the contrary from the defence. Later, the defendant did give evidence in which he alleged that the statement was improperly obtained but it is apparent from the record that the magistrate had reached the conclusion before that evidence was given that the statement was admissible.

3. There were various other grounds of appeal upon which I do not intend to comment. In view of the above, Mr. Duffy, Crown Counsel, admitted that he was unable to ask the Court to send the case back for retrial, so that the appeal is allowed and the conviction set aside.

Representation:

K. Kwok & Van Buuren (H.H. Lau & Co.) for appellant.

Duffy for crown.