HKSAR v. SO YIU KEUNG

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1997, No.60
(Criminal)

________________

________________

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

Power, V.-P.(giving the judgment of the Court):

1. The applicant was convicted on one count of murder after trial before Stuart-Moore and a jury. He now seeks leave to appeal against that conviction. Mr. Mullick, instructed by the Director of Legal Aid, appears to assist the Court. Mr. Mullick has informed us that he is unable to find any arguable ground. The applicant in his written grounds says that the decision was unfair as too much consideration was given to the evidence of the police and his evidence was not given proper consideration. He has today also suggested that the trial judge was prejudiced against him.

2. It was the Crown case that the applicant picked up his victim, who was a 16-year-old girl, in Mongkok on the evening of 8^th March 1996. Both lived in Fanling but she, apparently, had moved to the area not too long before. On the pretext of assisting of to find her way home he took her to an abandoned house. There was clear evidence that he had strangled her and stabbed her with a broken bottle and had thereby caused her death. His defence seemed to be that he had no intention to kill her or to cause her any serious harm. The nature of the injuries and the medical evidence provided ample evidence upon which the jury could properly come to conclusion that he was guilty of murder. There was no hint of any prejudice in the summing-up by the trial judge. It was impeccable -clearly outlining the law and comprehensively summarizing the pertinent facts. There is nothing which calls into question the decision of the jury. Indeed it was, in our view, given the evidence the only decision to which they could properly have come. The application is dismissed.