31 Jan 2012
The magistrate properly assessed the delayed complaint, considered and rationalized apparent inconsistencies, and was entitled to accept the complainant's credibility; therefore the conviction for indecent assault was not unsafe and the appeal was dismissed.
1 Feb 2008
Given the four year delay, the failure of the contemporaneous complaint to include the most damaging allegation, the family context suggesting potential motive to exaggerate, and the magistrate's over-reliance on demeanour in a case with an unusual defendant, the appellate court concluded there is a reasonable doubt and quashed the conviction; retrial was not appropriate.
29 Apr 2005
The appeal was dismissed because the alleged discrepancies in the transcript did not create a reasonable or lurking doubt; the magistrate was entitled to accept PW5's evidence based on demeanour and inherent probabilities, and therefore the convictions under s73 Crimes Ordinance were safe and upheld.
19 Nov 2003
Although the trial judge used imprecise and legally incorrect phrasing in describing the statutory presumptions and omitted some standard directions (eg full lies direction and fuller formula on inferences), those errors were either favourable to the defence or non‑prejudicial in the context of the whole summing up; the travel record was admissible and relevant under Makin to rebut the defence; accordingly the conviction was safe and the appeal is dismissed (leave granted but appeal dismissed).
3 Jul 2002
The trial judge's directions on demeanour and the use of exhibits were legally correct and balanced; there was overwhelming evidence including admissions and the composition and distribution of the 'robber's kit' for which no credible innocent explanation existed, therefore the convictions were safe and the appeal was dismissed; the court exercised its power under section 83W Cap.221 to exclude three months of custody for each applicant.
29 May 1998
The Court held that the Magistrate properly considered the evidence, was entitled to conclude that the appellant committed the indecent assault as described, did not improperly rely on demeanour, and did not rely on any alleged admission to PW2; accordingly there was no miscarriage of justice and the appeal was dismissed.
29 Apr 1998
Conviction quashed because the appellant's difficulty with punti dialect and the magistrate's contradictory findings and undue reliance on the appellant's demeanour rendered the conviction unsafe; sentence set aside and no retrial ordered due to the minor nature of the offence and unavailability of the defence witness.
13 Mar 1997
The appeal was allowed because the magistrate wrongly disregarded material and corroborative evidence of an independent witness and failed to resolve material conflicts, rendering the conviction unsafe and liable to be quashed.
11 Sept 1996
The appeal was dismissed because the magistrate's credibility findings were open on the evidence: the admissions were held to be voluntary and reliable, the magistrate expressly considered and rejected the assault allegation, he had regard to the medical report and made allowances for the appellant's impairments, and any reliance on demeanour did not constitute sole or impermissible basis for the verdict; therefore no miscarriage of justice was shown.
24 Aug 1993
The Court allowed the appeal and quashed the convictions because the trial judge, while generally entitled to prefer the complainant on demeanour, failed to properly evaluate material corroborative defence evidence (the wife's testimony about the new $1,000 note and the complainant's demeanour at a family outing) and thereby rendered the convictions unsafe and unsatisfactory.