30 Dec 2016
香港特別行政區 訴 張嘉豪
- Citation
- 香港特別行政區 訴 張嘉豪
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA109/2016
The Court allowed the appeal against convictions for counts 1–3 because the appellate court was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the touching while bathing could not reasonably be explained as non‑sexual caregiving and the judge's inference of indecent intent was not the only reasonable inference; the Court dismissed the appeal against conviction for count 4 because the trial judge, who saw the witnesses, reasonably found that handcuffing and pointing a gun‑like object deliberately caused the child to fear violence and established hostile intent beyond reasonable doubt.