THE QUEEN v. WOO TAT MING

BETWEEN:

-----------------

JUDGMENT

-----------------

1. This is an appeal against conviction and sentence by WOO Tat-ming ("D.1"), who was convicted of four offences, one of possession of an offensive weapon, one of resisting arrest and two of theft. He was sentenced to six months' imprisonment, concurrent, on the possession of offensive weapon and resisting arrest charges and to three months' imprisonment on each of the two theft charges, these to be concurrent but consecutive to the six month's imprisonment, making a total of nine months.

2. On 27th June, 1986, a police officer ("P.W.1") saw D.1 acting suspiciously. He stopped and searched him and found in his right-hand trouser pocket an orange knife and a silver coloured necklace. When P.W.1 questioned him, D.1 pushed him and ran away. He was recaptured shortly afterwards following a chase and a struggle.

3. After his arrest, D.1 was taken to the police station where various statements were taken from him. These were admitted in evidence, although D.1 complained that they had been obtained from him by pressure and threats. In these statements, he volunteered information that he had committed the two thefts, of which he was subsequently convicted, by stealing goods from a fruit stall and a food stall.

4. D.1 gave evidence, denying that he had been carrying the knife at the time of his arrest and alleging that he had not committed the thefts but had only signed the supposed cautioned statements after he had been assaulted by two police officers, including P.W.1.

5. The magistrate believed the police witnesses and rejected the evidence given by D.1 both on the voir dire and on the general issues. He sets out his reasons for this and they justify his conclusion.

6. There are no grounds on which I could interfere with his findings and the appeal against conviction is dismissed.

7. The sentence imposed for possession of an offensive weapon is the minimum prescribed by law. The sentences of three months' each on the two charges of theft are entirely proper, bearing in mind that D.1 is 38 and he has 22 previous convictions, including two for theft, one for resisting arrest and one for possession of an offensive weapon.

8. The appeal against sentence is also dismissed.