HKSAR v. Cheung Kwai Tim

HCMA001142/1997

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 1142 OF 1997

(On appeal from TWC 1921 of 1997)

____________

____________

Coram: The Honourable Mrs Justice V. Bokhary in Court

Date of Hearing: 17 March 1998

Date of Judgment: 17 March 1998

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1. This is an appeal against conviction. The Appellant, a man of previous good character in his 40's, faced two charges of common assault contrary to Section 40 of the Offences Against the Person Ordinance, Cap. 212. He was tried before T. H. Casewell Esquire sitting in the Magistrate's Court at Tsuen Wan; and on 18th November 1997 he was convicted on both charges. He was fined $750.00 in the first charge and $500.00 on the second charge and was ordered to pay $500.00 costs. He now appeals against his convictions.

2. His grounds of appeal as set out in his Notice of Appeal against conviction read as follows:

"The 1st and the 2nd witnesses evidence/testimony didn't collaborate with each other. The doubts didn't elaborate the right and wrong. Cheung Kwai-tim. There was no sufficient evidence whereon to found the said conviction."

In court he also handed up to me a written document in support of his appeal.

3. In his Statement of Findings, the Magistrate, after outlining the prosecution and the defence cases, went on to give a thorough and careful assessment of the evidence. At the bottom of page 5 of his Statement of Findings, he said this:

"After considering all the evidence, I was satisfied that I could rely upon the evidence of PW1 and PW2 as to the essential facts that the Appellant had held the boy round the neck and hit him on the head and that he had later slapped PW1 on the face. In making this finding I bore in mind the discrepancy between the evidence of PW1 and 2."

4. The Magistrate fully considered all the discrepancies between the evidence of two prosecution witnesses before he made the findings that he did. There was ample evidence upon which to convict.

5. Accordingly, this appeal against conviction is dismissed.

Representation:

Ms. Rosaline Leung, S.G.C., for HKSAR/Respondent.

Appellant: Cheung Kwai-tim (I.D. No. D049283(4))(present), in person.