HKSAR v. LAU MEI WAH

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1996, No. 683
(Criminal)

______________

______________

______________

J U D G M E N T

______________

Mayo, J.A. (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. The Applicant seeks leave to appeal against her conviction for robbery. She was found guilty of this offence after a trial before H.H. Judge Cheung in the District Court.

2. It was a taxi robbery. Shortly after 6:00 a.m. in the morning on 26 October 1995 a taxi driver Mr. Cheung picked up two women at the junction of Nam Cheong Street and Wai Chi Street. The women instructed him to go to So Uk Estate. Mr. Cheung noticed that one of the women, who it subsequently transpired was the Applicant, put on a pair of sunglasses and raised the hood of her white wind-cheater.

3. On arrival at the destination he was hit on the back of his head by a hard object. He turned around and saw the Applicant holding a knife. She demanded that he should give her the money he had in the taxi. He told her to get it herself from the ash tray of the taxi. While she was doing this a struggle ensued between Mr. Cheung and the woman. He attempted to wrest the knife from her. During the struggle both Mr. Cheung and the Applicant sustained the injuries which are referred to in the medical evidence which was before the court.

4. Both women succeeded in escaping from the taxi but a further struggle ensued outside on the street. The women managed to make good their escape. Mr. Cheung made a report to the police and went to the Caritas Medical Centre to receive medical treatment. While there one of the police officers who was with Mr. Cheung made inquiries of other patients awaiting treatment, he saw the Applicant, with injuries, with another woman. This other woman admitted that she had recently perpetrated a taxi robbery and claimed to be solely to blame for what had occurred. Mr. Cheung identified her as being one of the women who had been in his taxi.

5. At an identification parade held 5 days later Mr. Cheung identified the Applicant as being the woman who had threatened him with the knife and subsequently struggled with him.

6. At the trial the Applicant gave evidence. She said that prior to entering the taxi she had consumed a quantity of alcohol. As a result of this she had dozed off to sleep. She claimed to have taken no part whatever in the robbery and that she had sustained injuries as a consequence of attempting to defend her friend who she thought was being assaulted by the taxi driver.

7. In her written application the Applicant states that it was her friend who committed the robbery and that she was innocent as she had been asleep in the taxi.

8. Before us, she claimed that the Judge was biased and impatient and that he had assisted Mr. Cheung when he gave evidence. There would appear to be no basis to these complaints. We are of this opinion having again examined the transcript of the proceedings.

9. Judge Cheung had all of the relevant evidence before him. It is manifest from his carefully considered reasons for verdict that he fully weighed and considered all of that evidence. There is no reason whatever to believe this conviction was in any way unsafe or unsatisfactory. This application is refused.