12 Jun 1996
Conviction quashed because the evidence relied upon by the magistrate was either inadmissible hearsay, equivocal in meaning, or insufficiently connected to the appellant such that it did not prove membership of the triad beyond reasonable doubt.
27 Oct 1995
The absence of evidence of any triad activity or association from 1980 until the 1995 statement, combined with the thin nature of the prosecution case and the limited probative value of the caution statement, raised a reasonable doubt such that the conviction was unsafe and had to be set aside.
26 Sept 1995
The Court held there was no substance to the complaint under Article 10 because the two groups of offences lacked a common factual origin and were of different nature and times, so no oppression or prima facie prejudice was shown; the identity of investigators did not by itself render the appellant's cautioned statement inadmissible; the trial judge's reliance on the statement was not inconsistent with finding the appellant an untruthful witness; identification evidence was properly dealt with under Turnbull — therefore the appeal is dismissed.
21 May 1992
The trial of D7 was valid because the magistrate was aware he was a young person (charge sheet and caution statements) and properly exercised the discretion in s3C(2)(c); the caution statements were voluntary and no oppression was alleged or proved at trial so new objections on appeal were impermissible; admissions corroborated by expert evidence about Triad admission practices were sufficient to sustain convictions; sentencing to detention was excessive in light of ages, reports and time in custody and was substituted with probation for 18 months.
9 Oct 1986
Membership of a triad society is a question of fact; a defendant's admission may, depending on circumstances and supporting evidence, constitute prima facie proof of membership; absent evidence of cessation, prior genuine membership may support a presumption of continued membership; on the facts before the magistrate there was a case to answer.
6 Oct 1976
The sentence of two years for possession of dangerous drugs for the purpose of trafficking was not excessive given possession of thirty-two packets; however the one year sentence for triad membership was excessive because it was based only on the appellant's admission with no evidence of triad activities, and must be reduced to two months to be served consecutively to the two year sentence.
1 Jun 1976
The magistrate did not abuse his discretion in ordering a trial de novo because the established errors were procedural (admission or unclear ruling on a confession and failure to disclose reliance on books under s.38) which justified a fresh hearing; the appellant's admission that he was a member was insufficient alone to prove membership but could support a conviction for claiming membership; appeal dismissed and order for retrial upheld.
3 Apr 1976
Because the magistrate effectively decided the statement was admissible before hearing defence evidence on its admissibility, the conviction was unsafe; the appeal is allowed and the conviction set aside.
7 Nov 1975
Sentences of six months were excessive absent evidence of active membership; therefore the custodial terms were reduced to two months but the orders for police supervision were appropriate and must remain in force.
27 Sept 1975
The police supervision order was inappropriate given the appellant's night-shift employment and was rescinded; the imposed consecutive prison sentences of nine months and six months were lawful and were upheld.