THE QUEEN v. LAU KIU TAI

HCMA001075/1995

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO.1075 OF 1995

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

BETWEEN
	THE QUEEN	Respondent
	AND
	LAU KIU TAI	Appellant

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

Coram : Hon Duffy, J. in Court

Date of hearing : 1 February 1996

Date of handing down judgment : 8 February 1996

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

J U D G M E N T

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

1. This was an appeal against a conviction for aiding and abetting the remaining in Hong Kong of an illegal immigrant. The appellant was the third of originally three defendants who were charged with various offences in connection with illegal immigrants. In his Statement of Findings, the learned Magistrate, inter alia, said this :

"The defence pointed out the way in which the 31st answers were recorded. I found no significance in this. Although no burden or proof rested upon the Defendant I did not believe her. The threats towards the young men in the van if made would have had very little effect upon her as she did not know them. Family ties would have had some effect if the allegation of ill health had been made about the illegal immigrant. However I believed the police officers and not the Appellant. The Defendant claimed to be so tired that when the officer read the statement through to her she did not listen. However this very tired woman who had come down to the police station with her husband has a very detail recollection of what was said and done during the interview. The Appellant was not a naive woman. She played a full part in her husband's company which had offices in Hong Kong and a factory in China. The interview itself lasted only 19 months and dealt with the very narrow issue."

2. The simple point on this appeal was that the learned Magistrate there was referring to objections to the admissibility of the cautioned statement of another defendant. At no stage during the trial had this appellant claimed to be so tired : "That when the officer read the statement through to her she did not listen". This was a demonstrable error of fact on the face of the record and one which persuaded me that this appeal must be allowed.

Representation:

Mr F. Veltro, S.C.C., for Crown

Miss Diana Cheung (David Ravenscroft) for Appellant

- 2 -

	(J.M. Duffy)
	Judge of the High Court