Lee Ah-koon and Others v. The Queen
Read the full judgment text of CACC 287/1976 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment.
1. The three appellants were convicted of manslaughter, the first appellant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of eight years and the second and third appellants were sentenced to a term of imprisonment of seven years each. They appeal against their sentences.
|
CACC000287/1976
Coram: Briggs, C.J., Huggins & Pickering, JJ.A. Date of Judgment: 19th May, 1976. ----------------- JUDGMENT ----------------- 1. The three appellants were convicted of manslaughter, the first appellant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of eight years and the second and third appellants were sentenced to a term of imprisonment of seven years each. They appeal against their sentences. 2. At the hearing of the appeal we asked for a resume of the facts to be put before the Court. This being an appeal only against sentence, we did not have a transcript of the evidence before us. 3. What happened in this case was that the three appellants, with other persons, planned an attack on the deceased. The deceased was a well-known triad member and a bully and the purpose of the attack was to stop his frequent demands on young male residents of Tsing Yi Island. The three appellants live on the Island. 4. The most important evidence put before the Court consisted of statements made by the three appellants. At the trial, each of the appellants gave evidence and admitted that they were involved in the killing of the deceased but in circumstances amounting to manslaughter and not to murder which was the suggestion contained in the statements above referred to. 5. It appears that the three appellants came upon the deceased whilst he was demanding money from one LAM Mai, a boy of 15. The appellants intervened, whereupon the deceased produced a knife and threatened them. A fight ensued and the first appellant, acting in the heat of the moment, stabbed the deceased with a weapon which was lying on the ground at the scene. The second appellant said that despite this the deceased kept on attacking them and the second appellant thereupon stabbed the deceased with a knife. The third appellant also admitted that he used a weapon on the deceased. 6. The first appellant is aged 20, the second aged 19 and the third is also aged 20. All three appellants have clear records. 7. In the circumstances, we think that the sentences passed by the trial judge were too high. In particular, we do not see any justification for differentiating the sentence passed on the first appellant from the sentences passed on the second and third appellants. In the event, we think that justice would best be done if we reduced the sentence of each of the appellants to one of five years' imprisonment, so their appeals are allowed to that extent.
Representation: Appellants in person. Reid for crown. |