HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1977

LAU KWOK-KONG v. THE QUEEN

Related cases with same parties

  • CAAR10/1992THE QUEEN v. WONG MOK DIN
  • CAAR11/1986THE QUEEN v. CHUNG WAI-YIU
  • CAAR12/1986THE QUEEN v. HSU SAI-MAN AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR15/1986THE QUEEN v. WU KAM MING AND OTHERS
  • CAAR15/1987THE QUEEN v. LEUNG WING FAI
  • CAAR16/1987THE QUEEN v. PANG CHEUNG KIM
  • CAAR19/1986THE QUEEN v. CHAN CHI MAN
  • CAAR22/1986THE QUEEN v. WONG TAK-CHI
  • CAAR23/1986THE QUEEN v. MA LAI WU AND OTHERS
  • CAAR4/1986THE QUEEN v. LY XUONG THANH
  • CAAR5/1986THE QUEEN v. YEUNG KAM-WAH (D1) AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR8/1986THE QUEEN v. ALBERT STANLEY MALIA
  • CAAR9/1986THE QUEEN v. CHU TAI WAI AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR9/1989THE QUEEN v. CHAN KOON KWOK ARTHUR
  • CACC1000/1976LAI FAT v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC1000/1983THE QUEEN v. LEE HEI KEUNG
  • CACC1001/1979LAW WAI-MING AND ANOTHER v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1972LIU KAM-MAN v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1973LO WAI KEUNG v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1977TAM YUK-MUI (F) v. THE QUEEN
5769-EN-1977-07-15

LAU KWOK-KONG v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000588/1977

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT 
  
 Criminal Appeal
 1977 No. 588

-----------------

 

BETWEEN  
 LAU Kwok-kongAppellant
 and 
 THE QUEENRespondent

-----------------

Coram: Cons, J.

Date of Judgment: 15th July 1977

 

-----------------

JUDGMENT

-----------------

 

1. This appellant was convicted of criminal intimidation and of obstruction and of assault upon a police officer in the execution of her duties. She was attempting to do her duty in relation to a possible hawking offence. The appellant was exceedingly coarse and abusive, pushed the officer to the ground and ultimately, as she strategically and sensibly retreated, threw a half brick at her. He said that the police officer twisted the facts at his trial. I do not think that this was so.

2. Two matters may be raised in his favour. The first is that though he pleaded not guilty he did not seriously contest his conduct at the trial which he conceded arose from his loss of temper. The second is that he has a completely clear record. He had been sick for a while prior to the incident and was attempting to make some money by hawking on credit. In the particular circumstances I am satisfied that it is the shock of going to prison rather than the length of the term itself that is important. Three months will be sufficient punishment for the appellant's conduct, while at the same time this will indicate to anyone else who is like-minded that prison for this kind of conduct is inevitable.

 

Representation:

Appellant in person.

Mr. Polson, Crown Counsel, for the respondent.