Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Oppression and inducement

Legal area

Court

27 Oct 2017

HKSAR v. YIM SHEK WO

Citation

HKSAR v. YIM SHEK WO
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCC164/2017

Prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the challenged admissions (verbal admission at Sha Tau Kok, the post‑record, and the video‑recorded interview and transcript) were voluntary; alleged threats, inducements and coaching were not established as having produced oppression; accused's transient illness did not render admissions involuntary; court declines to exclude admissions in exercise of discretion.
19 Jul 2016

HKSAR v. SUN YUK LING

Citation

HKSAR v. SUN YUK LING
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCCC228/2015

The VRI (VDP6), the Post Record (VDP4) and the mobile phone exhibit (VDP9) are inadmissible because the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the statements were voluntary and the exhibit provenance was reliable: the defendant was subjected to oppressive detention and questioning (overnight in an interview room without adequate rest or supervision, questioning in the small hours, uncautioned rehearsal and inducement), and the chain of custody for the mobile phone was fatally defective.
17 Dec 1999

HKSAR v. LAU CHI YUEN

Citation

HKSAR v. LAU CHI YUEN
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA553/1999

The appellate court upheld the Magistrate's detailed findings that the welfare visit was a genuine request by the accomplice, that the interview was not the product of oppression or inducement, and that the Magistrate acted within discretion in admitting the interview and in accepting parts of the accomplice's evidence on the special issue; therefore the convictions stood.
3 Jul 1998

HKSAR v. LO YAU FUK

Citation

HKSAR v. LO YAU FUK
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC355/1997

The trial judge, who viewed the video interviews and heard witnesses, found on the evidence that the challenged admissions were made freely and voluntarily and were not caused by oppression or by the inducements mentioned; the Court of Appeal, deferring to those factual findings and concluding they were supportable, refused leave to appeal and dismissed the appeal.
4 Jun 1993

R. v. YUEN KWOK WING and Another

Citation

R. v. YUEN KWOK WING and Another
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC406/1992

The Court held that the trial judge's directions, taken in their entirety and against the detailed recitation of the contested allegations and evidence, were adequate; admissibility/voluntariness was correctly determined by the judge and the jury were properly directed to assess probative value. Although preferable to have used fuller wording about oppression/inducement and certain directions in future, the deficiencies did not render convictions unsafe. The challenges to directions on recent possession, failure to give a Broadhurst direction, the medical evidence of physical incapacity, and…
4 Feb 1986

THE QUEEN v. LEE CHUNG-TIN AND ANOTHER

Citation

THE QUEEN v. LEE CHUNG-TIN AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC128/1985

The majority upheld the trial judge's factual finding that the cautioned second interview was voluntary and admissible and applied the proviso to conclude any error in admitting prejudicial triad membership evidence did not produce a miscarriage of justice; appellate intervention on voluntariness is unwarranted absent clear error and overall conviction stands.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. YIM SHEK WO

HKSAR v. SUN YUK LING

HKSAR v. LAU CHI YUEN

HKSAR v. LO YAU FUK

R. v. YUEN KWOK WING and Another

THE QUEEN v. LEE CHUNG-TIN AND ANOTHER