19 Dec 1996
R. v. CHAN TUNG CHEUNG
- Citation
- R. v. CHAN TUNG CHEUNG
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACC198/1995
The court refused to admit the post‑conviction letter as fresh evidence because its provenance and timing undermined its credibility, the accomplice was unavailable and incentivised to recant, and substantial independent trial evidence supported the conviction such that the letter, even if authentic, would not sufficiently undermine the safety of the verdict.