Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Identification evidence (turnbull guidelines)

Legal area

Court

29 Oct 2004

HKSAR v. SHEK TSAN YIN

Citation

HKSAR v. SHEK TSAN YIN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA683/2004

The magistrate's verdict was correct because she properly considered the quality and circumstances of identification evidence: PW3's prior acquaintance with the appellant and his identification at an identification parade provided a sufficient and reliable basis under Turnbull to convict on the charge concerning PW3, while the evidence concerning PW1 and PW2 was insufficient to convict the appellant on those charges; therefore the appeal is dismissed.
31 Mar 2000

HKSAR v. IP CHOR CHEONG

Citation

HKSAR v. IP CHOR CHEONG
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA58/2000

The Magistrate applied the Turnbull guidelines correctly, any remark about police writing ability was an inappropriate but harmless comment that did not amount to judicial notice or prejudice, the appellant suffered no unfairness from counsel's misunderstanding of the statutory provision because the charge was properly amended and the defence (mistaken identity and lack of possession) was unaffected; therefore the appeal must be dismissed.
1 Feb 1980

WONG YING CHAU v. THE QUEEN

Citation

WONG YING CHAU v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC51/1980

Although the learned magistrate omitted to call the officer who conducted the identification parade and did not expressly apply the Turnbull directions, the properly admitted confession statements and the totality of the evidence provided sufficient basis for the magistrate to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was guilty; therefore the appeal is dismissed.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. SHEK TSAN YIN

HKSAR v. IP CHOR CHEONG

WONG YING CHAU v. THE QUEEN