Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Accomplice evidence and corroboration

Legal area

Court

5 May 2022

香港特別行政區訴王維忠

Citation

[2022] HKCFI 1263
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA445/2021

The Court held the trial judge lawfully and adequately assessed the credibility and reliability of PW1 and PW2 (including their immunity and motive for mitigation), relied on objective corroboration (bank deposit records and documents), and correctly applied appellate principles; the evidence proved both conspiracy offences beyond reasonable doubt, so the convictions were safe and the appeal was dismissed.
5 Nov 2010

HKSAR v. CHAN KAI YIU

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN KAI YIU
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC257/2009

The Court upheld the trial judge's findings: PW1 was a credible accomplice witness whose testimony was corroborated by documentary evidence and other witnesses; the applicant's denials in his interview were rejected as implausible; despite rejecting PW7 the remaining evidence including admissions and documents permitted the only reasonable inference that the applicant knew the transactions and falsified accounting records, therefore convictions are safe.
16 Dec 1999

HKSAR v. CHAN SIK WAI AND ANOTHER

Citation

HKSAR v. CHAN SIK WAI AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC134/1999

D1's conviction upheld because exclusion of certain tape extracts was proper, disclosure and adjournment were sufficient, and the totality of contemporaneous recordings, discovery of heroin and accomplice evidence constituted overwhelming admissible evidence proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt; D2's sentence was within the proper exercise of judicial discretion, mitigation and cooperation were taken into account and the resulting sentence was not manifestly excessive.
15 Nov 1999

HKSAR v. LAW HAY CHUNG AND OTHERS

Citation

HKSAR v. LAW HAY CHUNG AND OTHERS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC628/1998

Section 60 removed the old mandatory corroboration direction; the trial judge properly exercised discretion in assessing accomplice testimony, sought independent supportive evidence where available, correctly admitted post-arrest conduct as probative of knowledge/participation against A1 and A2, and the totality of direct and circumstantial evidence (banking records, cash transfers, seized items, videotape and consistent accomplice testimony) proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt; convictions are safe.
17 Aug 1999

HKSAR v. CHANG KIT WAI

Citation

HKSAR v. CHANG KIT WAI
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC444/1998

The convictions are safe: the trial judge properly evaluated PW12's evidence with caution and did not rely on unsupported allegations; abundant independent circumstantial evidence, including documents found in D2's room, telephone arrangements, fingerprints, bank passbooks and transfers, established D2's involvement and dishonest intent for both possession of false instruments and conspiracy to defraud; consequently the application for leave to appeal against conviction is dismissed.
18 Apr 1996

R. v. FATEH MOHAMMAD (alias HABIB SHAH)

Citation

R. v. FATEH MOHAMMAD (alias HABIB SHAH)
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC220/1994

The conviction was safe because independent and corroborative evidence (testimony of prosecution co‑operator Leung, ICAC surveillance including Ramshaw and observer Valiant, physical evidence) made any hearsay or summing‑up irregularity immaterial; the proviso applies and no prejudice to applicant arose; unproven allegations against ICAC do not render conviction unsafe.
17 Nov 1995

R. v. TAMUNO LEWIS MARTINS

Citation

R. v. TAMUNO LEWIS MARTINS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC29/1995

The conviction is safe because the Crown proved physical possession and hand-over, the trial judge gave proper directions on presumption of knowledge and the need for corroboration of accomplice evidence, alleged misdirections and other complaints were matters for the jury or unsupported, and the applicant understood and fairly participated in trial proceedings; accordingly leave to appeal is refused.
6 Jun 1995

R. v. KO YIU CHUN

Citation

R. v. KO YIU CHUN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA137/1995

The magistrate erred in treating the appellant's silence as acceptance of the illegal immigrant's statement; where the immigrant's testimony was rejected as wholly unacceptable, silence alone and the mere observation of the immigrant working were insufficient to sustain a conviction, rendering the conviction unsafe and liable to be quashed.
22 Nov 1994

LAU YAT PANG and Another v. R.

Citation

LAU YAT PANG and Another v. R.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC260/1994

Convictions were upheld because the judge properly identified discrepancies and cautioned the jury about accomplice evidence and the jury were entitled to accept the Crown evidence; however the custodial sentences were inappropriate for these juvenile offenders where the victim was of about the same age and, given the circumstances, detention in a training centre was the proper disposition, so the Court quashed the imprisonment sentences and ordered training centre detention.
4 Mar 1994

TSE KWOK KEUNG and Others v. R.

Citation

TSE KWOK KEUNG and Others v. R.
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC529/1991

The court held the deputy judge did not err: Chung's cautioned statements were admissible as voluntary after full consideration of allegations; the directions on accomplice evidence were adequate given the warning and available corroboration; convictions are upheld but, having regard to comparative authorities and the relative roles of the appellants, the sentences were excessive and should be reduced by about one third to 12, 16 and 14 years respectively.