KU KIN MAN v. THE QUEEN

CACC000350/1981

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT
	Criminal Appeal
	1981 No. 350

 

BETWEEN
	KU KIN MAN	Appellant
	and
	THE QUEEN	Respondent

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

Coram: Liu, J. in Court.

Date of Judgment: 26th May 1981

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

1. This is an appeal against conviction for trafficking. Mr. Whitehouse for the Crown fairly conceded that the Crown did not seek to support the verdict. However, counsel asked for an order for retrial by reason of the overwhelming accusation from the two police officers.

2. The co-defendant of the appellant pleaded guilty to a charge of possession, but he was not called as a witness in the proceedings against the appellant. Certain conversation was allegedly had with the said co-defendant in the presence and within the hearing distance of the appellant.

3. At p.18 of the records of appeal, in his Statement of Findings the learned Magistrate treated the said conversation as if it had been evidence given viva voce by the appellant's co-defendant. The learned Magistrate further warned himself of the dangers of convicting on the evidence of an accomplice. The appellant's co-defendant not having himself given evidence, therefore there was an inaccuracy in an otherwise well-reasoned Statement of Findings.

4. Counsel for the appellant was equally decent enough not to oppose an order for re-trial.

5. The appeal must therefore be allowed and the conviction quashed and the sentence set aside. I grant an order for re-trial before another magistrate. Bail is given to the appellant on such terms as those on which bail had at one time been granted to the appellant until further order of this Court or a magistrate.

 

 

	(B. Liu)
	Judge of the High Court

 

Representation:

Mr. A.A. Hoosen instructed by Hoosen & Co. for Appellant.

Mr. F. Whitehouse, counsel for Respondent.