HKSAR v. Ng Wai Kei and Another

CACC000059A/1997

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE HKSAR

1997, No. 59
(Criminal)

^{_____________________}

^{_____________________}

Coram: Hon Liu, J.A., Wong and Saied, JJ.

Date of hearing: 14 August 1997

Date of judgment: 14 August 1997

^{_____________________}

J U D G M E N T

^{_____________________}

Liu, J.A.:

1. The applicant NG Wai-cheong was convicted of robbery in the District Court. He seeks leave to appeal against conviction. He also applies for leave to appeal against sentence but that application is deferred after our consideration of his present application.

2. He was charged before the District Judge that on 13 August 1996 together with Ng Wai-kei, they robbed a taxi-driver of $1,000. In the course of the robbery, a knife was produced and used to threaten the taxi-driver. The knife was placed against the taxi-driver's neck.

3. As far as the co-defendant of the applicant is concerned, he faced in the same proceedings before the District Judge three charges of robbery. The first was a taxi robbery which occurred on 5 August 1996, in which he and his girl-friend together with another male robbed the taxi-driver. The next day, 6 August 1996, this co-defendant together with his girl-friend and another male robbed another taxi-driver. On both occasions, a knife was produced to threaten the taxi-drivers. In the second robbery, the taxi-driver put up resistance and he was chopped to the bone. In the third robbery, the one the applicant was charged with, the co-defendant of applicant pleaded guilty to all the three charges. His girl-friend gave evidence at the trial implicating the applicant in the first and the second robberies I have just described. But obviously that had no bearing on the charge the applicant faced.

4. What happened was that after these robberies, the co-defendant of the applicant and his girl-friend were confronted by the police and arrested. That was on the 16 August 1996. Thereafter the police raided premises. With a search warrant, they entered the home of the applicant. Of the other brothers of the co-defendant, the applicant was picked out by the police and arrested.

5. The applicant gave no less than three confessions to the police at three interviews. He objected to the admissibility of these documents on the ground that he was assaulted by police officers and mistreated by them.

6. The applicant also maintained that he was induced to sign one and the other of these statements because the police said they would offer him bail. The Judge heard the issue of admissibility and decided in the end to admit all the confessions of the applicant as voluntary statements. It was upon these admissions he made to the police at these three interviews that the applicant was convicted.

7. He seeks leave to appeal against his conviction. No grounds is specified in his Notice of Application. Today he relates to personal circumstances, family background and his past addiction as well as his denial of any participation in the robbery with which he was charged. He tells this court that when his brother robbed in the robbery with which he was charged, he as a brother was caught by surprise in a predicament. He was unable to take any prompt action to dissociate himself from what was being perpetrated by his brother. But he claims that he did not participate in the robbery although he did not report the matter to the police. In his own words, he says "I did not commit the crime". The Judge found the applicant guilty on his confessions made at the three interviews. We can find nothing which would throw any doubt on the conclusion reached by the Judge, relying on these confessions. We have also taken into account the matters advanced to us today by the applicant, but none of these offers any real assistance. His application is therefore dismissed.

Representation:

Mr D G Saw SC & Miss Alice Chan of DPP for respondent

NG Wai-kei (D1) in person against sentence.

NG Wai-cheong (D3) in person against conviction & sentence.