Read the full judgment text of CACC 000546/1999 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 21 July 2000 before Stuart-Moore VP, Leong JA, Wong JA.
Criminal law – blackmail – wounding with intent – identification evidence – demand with menace – sentencing – guilty plea discount – Criminal appeal – On 2 June 1999, applicants jointly went to the Cowboy Pub in Kowloon to demand 'local bully fee' (protection money) from whoever was running the pub – PW1, a relative of the owner, was mistaken by some customers as the boss – 2nd applicant told PW1 that if he took over the business, he would come to collect protection money; when PW1 said it had nothing to do with him, abusive language was used – 1st applicant lured PW1 outside where 2nd applicant punched and kicked him and shouted 'chop him with knife' – 1st applicant then attacked PW1 with two knives, inflicting serious chop wounds to both upper limbs, including complete severance of the left little fingertip, multiple fractures, and nerve and tendon injuries – PW1 spent 14 days in hospital and was left significantly and permanently disabled, unable to hold a pen or chopsticks – three passing police officers witnessed the attack – Whether identification evidence of PW1 against 2nd applicant was reliable, given lighting, duration of observation and prior alcohol consumption – held: identification was reliable; PW1 had sat face to face with the 2nd applicant and conversed, had a second opportunity to observe him during the assault, and had seen him previously in October 1998, making this a case of recognition, and the Judge properly applied the Turnbull guidelines – Whether there was an immediate demand with menace for the offence of blackmail notwithstanding the 2nd applicant's use of the future tense – held: yes; the demand was immediate, with menace implicit, as shown by demeanour, triad slang, abusive language on refusal, and the violence inflicted within minutes of the failure to pay – Whether 1st applicant on the wounding charge was entitled to the full one-third discount for a timely guilty plea entered on the first day of trial – held: yes; settled practice in HKSAR v Wong Ka-kuen (CACC 35/1998) and HKSAR v Yeung Kin-man (CACC 20/2000) entitles a defendant to a full one-third discount for a timely plea, and being caught 'red-handed' is no longer a sufficient reason to disallow the full discount – 1st applicant's conviction appeal abandoned and dismissed; 1st applicant's sentence appeal allowed and wounding sentence reduced from 6 years to 4 years and 8 months with consecutive 2 years on blackmail making 6 years and 8 months total – 2nd applicant's conviction and sentence applications dismissed.
Legal issues: Reliability of identification evidence of PW1 against 2nd applicant · Whether the demand for protection money constituted an immediate demand with menace for blackmail · Whether a full one-third discount for guilty plea should have been given to the 1st applicant on the wounding charge
Outcome: 1st applicant's application for leave to appeal against conviction abandoned and dismissed; 1st applicant's application for leave to appeal against sentence allowed, with sentence on wounding charge reduced from 6 years to 4 years and 8 months and total sentence reduced from 7 years to 6 years and 8 months. 2nd applicant's applications for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence on both charges dismissed.
Cited by 2 cases · Cites 1 case