Ng Kin Ting v. The Queen
|
CACC000823/1973 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 823 OF 1973 -----------------
----------------- Coram: Huggins, J. Date of Judgment: 3rd December 1973. ----------------- JUDGMENT ----------------- 1. This is an appeal against sentence but in view of what has been said to me this morning I must record the proceedings in some detail. The Appellant appeals out of time pursuant to leave granted by the learned magistrate under s.114A of the Magistrates Ordinance. The Appellant was charged with possession of an offensive weapon in a public place and with membership of a Triad Society. The necessary leave of the Attorney General for the charge in respect of the first offence was duly given. The necessity for that leave may well account for the fact that on 7th September the Appellant was taken before a magistrate and no plea was taken. The Appellant was remanded in police custody for one day and on 8th September he came before the same magistrate - a magistrate, it may be noted, of considerable experience. The charges were then read to the Appellant and in respect of each, he said "I admit it". The learned magistrate thereupon recorded a plea of guilty in respect of each charge. He then caused the brief Statement of Facts prepared by the police to be read to the Appellant. It is sufficient to say that that statement showed that at 9:05 on 5th September acting on information the police stopped a motor-car in Shatin: the appellant was one of the occupants and a search revealed two meat-knives placed on the rear seat beside the Appellant's right thigh. When first asked to explain the presence of these knives the Appellant was unable to give any satisfactory account. Upon further questioning he admitted that he and the other two male occupants of the car were on the way to Shatin to attack members of the Woo Shing Yee Triad Society. Other police enquiries revealed that on the previous day a member of the 14K Triad Society, of which the Appellant admitted he was a member, had been attacked by some of the Woo Shing Yee Triad Society in Shatin and this excursion by the Appellant and his two colleagues was a retaliatory attack. That was the substance of the Statement of Facts, and it was admitted by the Appellant. In mitigation the Appellant merely asked for leniency. The learned magistrate passed sentences of nine months' imprisonment and three months' imprisonment consecutive in respect of the two offences. It was on 11th October that the Appellant applied to the learned magistrate for leave to appeal out of time. On that occasion he said he did not know he was out of time; that his mother was sick and could not work; and he begged to be given a chance. 2. There can be no possible doubt that on 8th September this Appellant intended to admit the charges against him and no possible criticism can be levelled against the learned magistrate for accepting his pleas of guilty. Today, for the very first time, the Appellant alleges that he pleaded guilty under duress. His story is that he was beaten at the time that he was arrested and that he was further assaulted on the morning that he was taken before the magistrate and that he was told that he must plead guilty. He further says that he was told he would not be allowed to communicate with his family until he had pleaded guilty and he new asserts that he was innocent of the offences. His mother has supported this story that he has told me but it is not without significance that she herself said nothing to anybody when she was first told by the Appellant that he had pleaded guilty under duress. 3. This, in any event, is an appeal against sentence and not an appeal against conviction, but in my view, as I said earlier, there is no doubt at all that this Appellant pleaded quite clearly and I think that it is impossible for me to say that his plea can now be reversed. I cannot believe that this Appellant is now telling the truth - some two months after the events which, he says, took place. Nobody can now be in any doubt in Hong Kong that the courts regard the possession of offensive weapons in a public place as a serious offence and that anyone convicted of that offence, whether rightly or wrongly, will receive heavy punishment. Although this Appellant is a comparatively young man - his mother says he is 17, although apparently his father reported that he was 19 - I cannot believe that he would have pleaded guilty to such a serious offence without making any complaint for two months if in fact he had been acting under duress. 4. I must consider this appeal on the basis of the facts as set out in the Statement of Facts. I have mentioned the Appellant's age. He had a clear record but, as the learned magistrate said, it was clear that the intervention by the police on this occasion had prevented one of the triad gang-fights which have latterly plagued this Colony. The Appellant was taking an active part in the offensive activities of the 14K Triad Society and he fully deserved the sentences which were imposed upon him. 5. The appeal is dismissed. 3rd December 1973. Representation: |