Tam Tong Tim v. The Queen
|
CACC000674/1974 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 674 OF 1974 -----------------
----------------- Coram: Briggs, C.J., McMullin & Pickering, JJ. Date of Judgment: 11th November, 1974. ----------------- JUDGMENT ----------------- 1. Despite his plea of guilty to a charge of blackmail, the particulars being that he made an unwarranted demand of $800 from a woman called Chan Shui-ping with menaces, the appellant has been permitted to appeal against his conviction, and the Chief Justice has directed that the appeal be heard by the Full Court. 2. The facts are that at about 09:40 hours on the 22nd July last a co-accused of the appellant, who is not now before the Court, approached this lady at her home in Kowloon and told her that her relative, a man called Chan Kam-shing had arrived in Hong Kong illegally. The co-accused left the name-card of the appellant with the lady and asked her to contact the appellant in order to obtain custody of her relative. At half past one in the afternoon of the following day the lady called at the appellant's home at Hung Ling Tung Tsuen, Fanling, where the appellant confirmed to her that her relative had arrived in Hong Kong illegally, stated that he was at Kat 0 Island, and that if she gave the appellant some money he would bring her relative from Kat 0 to see her. The initial demand was for $1,000 but a figure of $800 was eventually agreed upon when the appellant told the lady that he would not arrange for the illegal immigrant to see her until she had paid the money. The lady then left and in the same afternoon reported the matter to the police who arrested the appellant. 3. The substantial ground of appeal is that the conversation between the appellant and the lady, although containing a demand for money, was not accompanied by menaces, the suggestion that the appellant should bring the illegal immigrant to the lady being rather in the nature of an offer of services than a menace. For the Crown it was urged that, as is well known, menaces can be of a veiled nature and that in the present instance there was a covert suggestion that if money was not forthcoming the illegal immigrant would either be kept in durance or reported to the police or otherwise disadvantageously treated. 4. The line is admittedly a fine one, but we are of the opinion that the conversation was certainly capable of being construed as containing menaces, and that the only person who can really say whether or not a menace was intended is the appellant himself. It is significant that in the light of his peculiar knowledge he chose to plead guilty to the offence and, as the learned magistrate said
5. It has been suggested to us that the appellant is an illiterate farmer who did not understand the charge which was read to him but the learned magistrate has recorded the fact that there was no doubt in his mind that the appellant fully understood the charge and knew full well what he was admitting - both as to the charge and the facts. 6. In the circumstances we would dismiss the appeal. 7. The appellant was sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment. He has a clear record but we are unable to say that for offences of this type the penalty was in any way excessive, and we also dismiss the appeal against sentence. Representation: Bernacchi, Q.C., & J. Chau (T.M. Chow & Co.) for appellant Carolan, C.C., for respondent. |