HKSAR v. Kan Kwok Chung
Read the full judgment text of HCMA 651/2006 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 22 August 2006.
1. The Magistrate was, in my view, entitled to feel sure, as he did, that the Appellant was the man who had conducted himself in the manner described by PW1 and PW2, whose evidence he was entitled to consider reliable, which he did.
|
HCMA 651/2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. HCMA 651 OF 2006 (ON APPEAL FROM TWCC 626 OF 2006) ____________ BETWEEN
____________ Before: The Honourable Mrs Justice V. Bokhary in Court Date of Hearing: 22 August 2006 Date of Judgment: 22 August 2006 _______________ J U D G M E N T _______________ 1.The Magistrate was, in my view, entitled to feel sure, as he did, that the Appellant was the man who had conducted himself in the manner described by PW1 and PW2, whose evidence he was entitled to consider reliable, which he did. 2.I am also of the view that the Magistrate was entitled to conclude, as he did, that the only reasonable inference to be drawn from such conduct was that the Appellant had attempted to steal PW1’s property as charged. No error was made by the Magistrate in how he went about convicting the Appellant of attempted theft. 3.This appeal against conviction is dismissed.
The Appellant, in person Mr Raymond Cheng, GC of the Department of Justice, for the Respondent |