20 Jun 2016
HKSAR v. DON AMARASINGHALAGE DON CHANDRA JANAKA
- Citation
- HKSAR v. DON AMARASINGHALAGE DON CHANDRA JANAKA
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACC283/2015
Because the judge failed, in the particular circumstances where the jury reacted adversely to being required to remain together overnight after a 4:3 split, to inform the jury the specific point that if after full discussion they could not agree they must say so (and to explain the effect of s27 Jury Ordinance), there was a real risk of unacceptable pressure on jurors; that risk rendered unsafe the 5:2 guilty verdict on Count 2 and required quashing of that conviction, while the unanimous conviction on Count 3 stood; retrial on Count 2 ordered.