Cheung Kwok-tung and Another v. The Queen

CACC000355/1978

Coram: Briggs, C.J., Huggins, J.A. and Leonard, J.

Date of Judgment: 16th October, 1978.

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

JUDGMENT

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

1. The first appellant pleaded guilty to one offence of blackmail and was sentenced to three years' imprisonment. The second appellant was found guilty of that offence and also sentenced to three years' imprisonment. The first appellant appeals against his sentence and the second appellant appeals against his conviction and sentence.

2. The particulars of the offence are that the two appellants together with others "made an unwarranted demand of $3,000 Hong Kong currency from Kwok Lan with menaces."

3. The two appellants were, at the time of the commission of the offence, police constables. At 8 o'clock in the evening of August 30th, 1977 a group of persons, amongst whom were the two appellants, entered a brothel. At the time, one Kwok Lan, a woman, was in charge of the premises. Kwok Lan gave evidence and said that one of the group stated that they were police officers and were there to check the licence of the establishment which was referred to as a "beauty parlour". Someone in the group said that if money was forthcoming no one would be arrested.

4. The brothel was equipped with an alarm bell. This was pressed and an auxiliary police sergeant, a woman, and a constable arrived. The group, including the appellants left the premises immediately and in a hurry. The police sergeant became suspicious and gave chase but was unsuccessful.

5. I will deal with the appeal against conviction of the second appellant first. At no time did Kwok Lan say that he made a demand for money. He was arrested three months after the date on wich the offence was committed and at an identification parade, Kwok Lan was unable to identify him as being one of the group who came to the brothel.

6. The only evidence to connect the second appellant with the offence is a statement that he made to a detective sergeant shortly after his arrest. The statement clearly puts the second appellant at the scene of the crime. His girlfriend had been arrested and the statement sought to exculpate her from participation in the crime. In fact, she was the third defendant in the court below and was convicted. She has not, however, appealed.

7. Otherwise, the statement is equivocal. It states that the second appellant and two other constables went to the brothel "to change money". It does not state that the second appellant made any demand or was privy to the making of a demand. All it does is to place the second appellant at the scene. And in view of the fact that there was no other evidence against him, we think that the conviction is unsafe. The conviction of the second appellant is therefore quashed and his sentence is set aside.

8. The first appellant was sentenced to three years' imprisonment. At the time of the offence he was a serving police officer and we think that three years is a just and proper sentence in the circumstances. His appeal against sentence is dismissed.

Representation:

R.Leung (Bernard Wong & Co.) for 1st Appellant

Sanguinetti (K.Y. Woo & Co.) for 2nd Appellant Sinclair for the Crown/Respondent