Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Lies as evidence

Legal area

Court

8 Dec 1998

HKSAR v. MO SHIU SHING

Citation

HKSAR v. MO SHIU SHING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC6/1998

The Court held the trial judge's directions on lies and flight, read in context, were legally correct and fair though some phrasing (notably 'consciousness of guilt') risks confusion; the proper test is whether lies or flight are proved, material, deliberate and not explicable by innocent motives before they may strengthen the prosecution case; grounds of appeal fail and leave is refused.
31 Mar 1993

R. v. LUK She-bun

Citation

R. v. LUK She-bun
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC196/1992

The trial judge's directions were adequate in the circumstances; no Broadhurst or Sharp direction was required and there was no unfairness that rendered the conviction unsafe; leave to appeal against conviction and sentence is refused.
11 Aug 1992

R. v. PATRICK DAVID WONG AND ANOTHER

Citation

R. v. PATRICK DAVID WONG AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC433/1990

The trial judge's direction on lies was ambiguous and could have led the jury, in a circumstantial case heavily reliant on alleged untruths, to treat lies as sufficient proof of guilt; because the jury were not warned that lies might be prompted by a desire to protect another, the convictions were unsafe and must be quashed and retrials ordered; fresh evidence was not admitted on appeal and retrial was appropriate given the strength of the case and public interest.
31 Jul 1991

THE QUEEN v. CHAN KUNG LING

Citation

THE QUEEN v. CHAN KUNG LING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC107/1990

Majority held cross‑examination and the judge's directions were permissible because the applicant was not being questioned or formally accused by police at the relevant moments and the circumstances were such that any reasonable person would have protested; consequently no impermissible adverse inference from silence was invited and the jury directions on good character and lies were proper; other grounds of appeal were dismissed and convictions upheld.
10 Nov 1983

THE QUEEN v. HO KAM-SUM AND ANOTHER

Citation

THE QUEEN v. HO KAM-SUM AND ANOTHER
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC695/1983

The convictions were unsafe because the trial judge gave materially misleading directions on the evidential effect of cautioned and alibi statements and on identification evidence (including inadmissible hearsay), and these misdirections together meant the jury could have been improperly influenced; accordingly the convictions were quashed and sentences set aside.

Hong Kong Case Law

HKSAR v. MO SHIU SHING

R. v. LUK She-bun

R. v. PATRICK DAVID WONG AND ANOTHER

THE QUEEN v. CHAN KUNG LING

THE QUEEN v. HO KAM-SUM AND ANOTHER