THE QUEEN v. LAI CHUN BIU

BETWEEN:

___________

JUDGMENT

___________

1. LAI Chun-biu ("D.1") appeals against his conviction on a charge of loitering.

2. D.1 was seen by two police officers at about 10.30 at night entering a residential building, by passing through the outside grille when it had been unlocked by somebody else. The officers followed him and after a while found him on the second floor corridor.

3. When he was asked by the police officers to explain what he was doing there, he identified himself to them but gave no explanation of his presence. He was therefore arrested and taken to the police station.

4. D.1, who gave evidence, said that he had not been arrested in that building at all but that three police officers had arrested him in the building in which he lived, which was a few hundred yards away from the building in which the two police witnesses say that they had arrested him.

5. The magistrate rejected D.1's evidence as a complete fabrication, accepted that of the police officers and was satisfied that the offence was proved. This he was fully justified in doing.

6. The appeal against conviction is therefore dismissed.

7. D.1 had not appealed against sentence but, nevertheless, addressed me as if he had, complaining that the magistrate had given undue weight to his previous record. This is appalling. Although he is only 33, D.1 has 28 previous convictions, including three for loitering and others for a wide range of offences.

8. I have no doubt that the magistrate's sentence of four months' imprisonment was correct and that he was also right to activate the suspended sentence of six months' imprisonment which was still within the suspension period at the time of this offence.