THE QUEEN v. POON HAK WING

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

Magistracy Criminal Appeal No. 345 of 1984

_____

___________

JUDGMENT

___________

1. This is an appeal against conviction for pickpocketing in Shatin Race Course.

2. The Crown relied substantially on the evidence of an off duty police constable Mr. Peter Chan. He said he saw the appellant taking a betting slip from a person, Mr. Mo Wan-piu, and that he subsequently joined the 2nd accused and the betting slip was in fact found on the 2nd accused. Although the 2nd accused pleaded not guilty to the charge at the beginning when he gave evidence he admitted that he took the betting slip but said the appellant had nothing to do with the theft. The magistrate has considered all the points that had been raised including that the victim Mr. Mo did say that the person who sat beside him wore glasses and apparently the 2nd accused at the trial was wearing glasses. The magistrate had to decide whether basically he believed the police constable when he says he saw the appellant take the ticket. He is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that that was so and I can see no reason why he was not entitled to come to that view. He said he was satisfied that the constable had ample opportunity to observe and identify both the appellant and 2nd defendant. Having considered this matter I am satisfied that the magistrate was quite right in coming to the conclusion that he did and the appeal is dismissed.