2 -
On the 15th November, 1979, the prismer returned home
in the early hours of the morning. He was found guilty of the
arson charge and must therefore have been found to have deliberately
set the premises on fire. The jury must also have accepted the
expert's evidence that Kerosene in fair quantity was the accelerant
used.
The lady co-tenant was known to the prisoner as suffering
from physical disabilities, and she was burnt to death. Three
male co-tenants made good their escape by leaping onto the street
pavement with a 20-foot drop. Of these three, two sustained minor
injuries in their jump.
The deceased female co-tenant had lived in harmony with
the prisoner prior to the fire. Evidence given at the trial
established that the prisoner in fact harboured no ill will towards
the deceased and that motivated by the strained relationship with
the two male co-tenants, the prisoner took to arson.
But it may
fairly be said that the prisoner had no real intention of burning
the lady co-tenant to death though he must have foreseen and did
foresee that his deliberate act of arson would in all probability
cause death or serious body injury to any occupant including the
deceased, particularly when the deceased was known to be handicapped
in motion. Thus, the jury unanimously found the prisoner guilty
of murder in addition to the offence of arson.
'
Setting fire to domestic premises in a residential
area is a crime which, in my respectful view, deserves no leniency,
whatever the motive. In the event of Your Excellency taking a merciful
view of the circumstances in which the arson and murder in this case
were committed, I would respectfully commend for your consideration
a term of imprisonment of not less than 15 years despite the matured
age of the prisoner.
His Excellency
The Governor of Hong Kong.
به پنچ
(B. LIU)
Judge of the High Court