BabelCite

Lei San Pou v. HKSAR

Read the full judgment text of FAMC 37/1999 on BabelCite. This FAMC judgment was delivered on 19 January 2000.

1. The applicant was the second of two defendants who were charged with fighting with each other in a public place. The first defendant pleaded guilty to the charge and became the first prosecution witness in the trial of the applicant before another magistrate. That magistrate bore in mind these facts in relation to the first defendant but accepted her evidence. He also accepted the evidence of a bystander who became the second prosecution witness. He found that the applicant was fighting with

Case No.FAMC 37/1999
Court
FAMC
Date19 Jan 2000
Judge—
Case Document
100%Judiciary

FAMC000037/1999

FAMC No. 37 of 1999

IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 37 OF 1999 (CRIMINAL)

(ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL

FROM HCMA NO. 796 OF 1999)

_____________________

Between:
LEI SAN POU Applicant
AND
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION Respondent

_____________________

Appeal Committee: Mr Justice Litton PJ, Mr Justice Ching PJ and Mr Justice Bokhary PJ

Date of Hearing: 19 January 2000

Date of Determination: 19 January 2000

___________________________

DETERMINATION

___________________________

Mr Justice Ching PJ:

1. The applicant was the second of two defendants who were charged with fighting with each other in a public place. The first defendant pleaded guilty to the charge and became the first prosecution witness in the trial of the applicant before another magistrate. That magistrate bore in mind these facts in relation to the first defendant but accepted her evidence. He also accepted the evidence of a bystander who became the second prosecution witness. He found that the applicant was fighting with the first defendant in a public place.

2. The applicant now seeks leave to appeal against her conviction and puts forward in her written application four matters, as follows:-

"(1) The contents of the medical report are untrue.
(2) Police dealt with the matter perfunctorily, e.g. they did not arrest me formally.
(3) Police tried to stall me when I asked to get back my statement. Later it was found that what was contained therein was inconsistent with what I had told the police.
(4) I have fresh evidence."

3. The first three of these matters are irrelevant to the conviction. The fourth does not assist her. The evidence, if any was relevant and admissible, should have been put before the magistrate and was not, even though she was then legally represented. In any event the matters which she wishes to put forward and the further submissions she has made to us cannot affect the findings of the magistrate.

4. This application is dismissed.

( Henry Litton ) ( Charles Ching ) ( Kemal Bokhary )
Permanent Judge Permanent Judge Permanent Judge

Representation:

Madam Lei San Pou, the Applicant, in person

Mr Albert Wong, SGC (of Department of Justice) for the Respondent