Wong Kwai @ Wong Fu v. The Queen
|
CACC000717/1972 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 717 OF 1972 -----------------
----------------- Coram: Huggins, J. Date of Judgment: 17th November, 1972. ----------------- JUDGMENT ----------------- 1. The Appellant was charged before the magistrate with possession of dangerous drugs for the purpose of unlawful trafficking. The drugs were alleged to be contained in ten packets, five of them containing a total of a mixture of 61.9 grammes containing 19.6 grammes of salts of esters of morphine and five larger packets containing 178.7 grammes of a mixture containing 81.9 grammes of barbitone. 2. There was a raid on premises at 726 Nathan Road, 9th floor by a party of Revenue Officers. They entered the front cubicle at those premises and saw the Appellant sitting on a bed. They revealed their identity and said why they had come, and the evidence was that immediately on hearing this the Appellant picked up something from the corner of the bed on which he was sitting and dropped it through the window. There appeared to be three packets wrapped in brown paper. A warning by one of the Revenue Officers that he do not to throw the packets was too late so the Officer reported to his superior, who immediately rushed downstairs. His evidence was that he found in the gutter in the street below three squashed packets, these packets having been run over by vehicles: there were three brown paper wrapped packets: he retrieved them and took them back upstairs: there they were identified by the officer who saw them thrown out of the window as being the same packets. Upon analysis they were found to contain the drugs which I have mentioned. 3. The Appellant's defence was that the whole case against him was a lie and he has repeated that story in this Court, adding here something which he did not say in the court below, namely that all the windows were closed so that it was impossible to drop anything out of the window. 4. There was, subject to one point, clear evidence upon which the magistrate could properly convict if he believed the evidence. The only possible doubt was as to the identity of the packets. The officer who saw them dropped did not get a very clear view and the magistrate was obviously exercised in his mind about this because he himself put a question to the witness:
His answer was
A great deal turned upon that answer, and the learned magistrate heard it. I did not hear it. It is obvious that the way in which that answer was given satisfied the magistrate that the witness was in no real doubt about the identity of these packets. He was clearly satisfied that three packets had been thrown out of the window, and it would indeed be a remarkable coincidence if three squashed packets had been found immediately underneath the window a few moments later unless they were the same packets. 5. In my view there was sufficient evidence upon which the learned magistrate could properly convict and it is impossible for me to say that he came to a wrong conclusion. 6. The appeal must be dismissed. 17th November, 1972. Representation: |