12 Mar 2009
CHEUNG CHI KEUNG v. HKSAR
- Citation
- CHEUNG CHI KEUNG v. HKSAR
- Court
- Court of Final Appeal
- Case number
- FACC9/2008
Although the jury were misdirected on how to conduct their deliberations (inappropriate board of directors analogy and 'give and take'), the proviso in s.83(1) Criminal Procedure Ordinance was applicable: a reasonable hypothetical properly instructed jury, having regard to the appellant's own evidence (punching and hammering the victim, handing a stone to Wu after the hammer broke, continuing to drive while hearing attacks and the victim's recognition), would inevitably have convicted the appellant of murder either by intent to cause really serious injury or under joint enterprise foresight.