January 9, 1909.]
SUPREME COURT.
Monday, January 4th.
IN CRIMINAL JURISDICTION.
BEFORE HIS HONOUR SIE FRANCIS PIGGOTT (CHIEF JUSTICE).
ALLEGED LARCENY AND RECEIVING.
Li Tsau and Kwan Hing were indicted on charges of larceny and receiving. Prisoners pleaded not guilty. and the following jurors were empanalled:-H. Gittins (foreman), A. Morfey, J. Dickie, G. Rapp, H. E. Craddock. E. A. Kennedy and H. J. van der Bosch.
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT. prisoner was then asked if he wished to question het witness and replied. I also wish to confess, but deny entirely about the knife.
The accused were then asked if they wished to make statements.
The first defendant said he had nothing further to say.
▸
The second said he did not make the gag. was made by the first prisoner.
It
The third man said they went to the house with the intention of robbing the inmates, thinking they would be asleep. But when they entered the house, they found them awake, and that was the reason the inmates gave the alarm. His Lordship remarked that in view of the interesting statements made he did not think it necessary to trouble the jurors with any reference to the evidence.
The Hon. Mr. W. Rees Davies, K.C., At- torney-General, who was instructed by Mr. The jury, without retiring, brought in a Dennys, Jr., from the office of the Crown Solici-verdiet of guilty against the three accused, and tor, informed his Lordship and the gentlemen his Lordship sentenced the first and second of the jury that the prisoners in this case were to five years hard labour, and the third defen- charged with stealing a large amount of cloth.dant to seven years' hard labour.
ing, and with being in possession of stolen property, well knowing the same to have been stolen. The owner of the property was the master of a blacksmith shop in Wing Lok Street. He would tell the Court that when he arose on
The jury, without retiring, returned a verdict of guilty against both prisoners on the second count, and his Lordship sentenced each man to three years' imprisonment with hard labour.
ALLEGED ROBBERY.
Chan To, Tse Yan and Li Kai were arraigned on a charge of robbery. Prisoners denied the charge, and the following jury was empanelled: -H. T. Richardson (foreman), 8. G. Fenton, S. Swart, R. Abraham, E. Raymond, G. K. Haxton and R. Aitken.
Tuesday, January 5th.
IN CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
(CHIEF JUSTICE).
THE PEAK MURDER.
The Hon. Mr. W. Rees Davies, K.C., Attorney-General, who was instructed by Mr. Dennys, Jr., from the office of the Crown Solicitor, appeared for the Crown, the prisoners being defended by Mr. H. C. Calthrop, who was instructed by Mr. R. D. Atkinson (of Messrs. Deacon, Looker and Deacon).
27
police, and pointed out the first prisoner. The doctor would say that death was due spinal haemorrhage a result of the blows on the back and the neck, Another witness would speak definitely as to the third accused being the man who struck the last, and ✨ this witness subsequently identified him at the Central Police Station from a number of other men. On the other hand he stated emphatically that the first and second acoused were not there. This was undoubtedly a discrepancy of a material character in the evidence, and the only sugges- tion the Attorney-General could make was that the witnesses must have been speaking about two distinct assaults. The facts, so far as they went, were simple, but the jurors would see. from the depositions that there would be some difficulty in sifting the whole truth.
The case stands part heard.
the morning of the 7th ultimo he missed four BEFORE HIS HONOUR SIR FRANCIS PIGGOTT boxes made of pigskin which contained a large amount of clothing. Information was imme- diately given to the police, and on the night of the 17th ultimo a Chinese constable saw the Kwok Leung, Li Shek Chang and Hung first defendant talking to the second. He also Hoi were indicted on the charge of killing and observed that he had something wrapped up in murdering one Pu Tung, at the Peak on a handkerchief, and, on questioning the first October 22nd of last year. Prisoners denied defendant, learned that it was clothing. The the
charge and the following jury was second defendant told the constable he was going empanelled:-T. P. Hall (foreman), H. J. van to buy the clothing from the first. The der Bosch, J. P. Ulderup, D. A. Purvos, H. constable also noticed that the first man had Reeves, H. E. Craddock and H. A. Lammert. ome pawn tickets, and he saw the second defendant snatch them from the first and tear them up. The policeman then arrested both defendants and regained the torn pieces of the pawn tickets. Pawnshops were then visited, and several of the stolen goods found and identified by the prosecutor as his property. Subsequently the police obtained a search war- The Attorney-General stated that the three rant and proceeded to search the premises where prisoners were standing their trial on a charge the two defendants were alleged to live. There of wilful murder committed on 22nd October they found the stolen bags with a number of last year. The first and second prisoners were other articles, and in addition some ropes, pepper, chair coolies in the employ of Mr. Holworthy, daggers and so forth.
and the third, who was in the employ of Mr. Gresson, was also a chair coolie. Apparently, from the evidence available, the murder was the outcome of some trivial quarrel which had taken place between the deceased, who was a Punti, and a Hoklo. The three prisoners were Hoklos. The story of the dispute in the first place would be told by a man named Woo Kain, & Punti who went up to the Peak with the deceased man that day. Another man who was in the tram with them appeared to have put his foot on the jacket of the deceased, and some trumpery dispute The Attorney-General informed the jurors followed. When the three men got out at the that the three prisoners were placed before the top tram station it appeared that the stranger Court on a charge of robbery with violence, challenged the deceased to fight. All three then The affair took place at 37, Kowloon City Road, walked away in the direction of the Peak Club. at about 7.15 on the morning of November 21st. At a certain spot which is described as Jardine's The inhabitants of the house at the time the Junction, the man Woo Kiu would tell the Court robbery took place were four women. The owner, that he saw some ten or more men, all Hoklos, a man, had gone out to work at seven o'clock. running up to where he was standing with A woman named So Mui would tell the main deceased and the stranger: He saw them strike facts connected with the robbery. She would blows at deceased, but appears to have ran away say that on the morning in question three men immediately. The story would then be taken walked up stairs to the second floor, and one of up by Ku Yun, who says he met the deceased at them called out "Here is a basket for you." Jardine's Junction at 11.45 a.m. and that he She was sitting on her bed when two of the men had a talk with him. He would say that while entered her room, the other going into the they were speaking the second defendant appro- cubicle of another woman, So Mui asked him ached and stepped deliberately on the foot of the where he was going, but at that moment she was deceased. The two men then had a dispute, and seized by the other two men who pulled two the second defendant ran up the steps to Gresson's bangles off her right wrist. The neigh-coolie house, called out, and some 6 or 7 coolies bours hearing a noise, gave the alarm, and the came from the house with bamboos, amongst robbers made off. Witnesses would say that all the number being the third prisoner. Some of the men were armed with knives, and one of the the coolies he said, poked deceased with the women was slightly wounded in the breast. As poles; and some struck him. he witness got far as the Attorney-General understood, the frightened and ran to Mt. Gough Police Station statements made by the prisoners to the to inform the police. On his return he found police implied that they were at the premises the deceased, his friend, dead. Another witness, about the time of the robbery, so it appeared to Wa Ping, would say that he saw the deceased be purely a question of whether the jurors were being chased by the first and second accused. satisfied with the identification of the men. The first accused struck him with a bamboo When the case for the Crown was nearing pole, and when he fell the second prisoner kicked completion, and the accused were asked if they him. After administering these blows, he said. wished to question a police witness, the second the two defendants ran back in the direction defendant, said-In reality I did commit this from which they had come. Shortly after the crime, but I did not carry a knife. The third murder this witness gave information to the
Wednesday, January 6th.
IN CRIMINAL JURISDICTION.
BEFORE HIS HONQUE SIR FRANCIS PIGGOTT (CHIEF JUSTICE).
THE PEAK MURDER. The hearing of the capital charge preferred against Kwok Leung, Li Shek Chung and Hang Hoi was continued before his Lordship and a jury composed of Messrs. T. P. Hall (foreman), H. J. van der Bosch, J. P. Ulderup, D. A. Purves, H. Reeves, H. E. Craddock and H. A. Lammert.
The Hon. Mr. W. Rees Davies, K.C., Attorney-General, who was instructed by Mr. Dennys, Jr., from the office of the Crown Solicitor, appeared for the Crown, the prisoners being defended by Mr. H. G. Calthrop, who was instructed by Mr. R. D. Atkinson (of Messrs. Deacon, Looker and Deacon).
forenoon.
The case for the prosecution closed in the
defence. He told the jurors that this was a case
• Mr. Calthrop, in the afternoon, opened the
in which the evidence brought by the prosecution was of a most extraordinary conflicting character. If the jury was to believe one of the witnesses, they would have to come to the conclusion that another was committing perjury. It was not a question of a mistake which a man might make, but the most deliberate perjury that he thought he had ever heard since he had been in the Colony. At the end of his speech, when opening the case, the Attorney-General said the only way he could possibly reconcile the evidence of the witnesses was by coming to the conclusion that they were giving evidence as to two different assaults down by the Peak Church. If the jurors believed the first witness they could not possibly believe the second. He would ask them to say on the evidence that it was impossible to believe any of the witnesses, except the European constables. It was a peculiar thing about this case that the three prisoners were Hoklos, and all the witnesses, including the lukongs, were Puntis. That was a very significant fact, adjourned.
Evidence was then called, and the hearing
Thursday, January 7th.
IN CRIMINAL JURISDICTION.
BEFORE HIS HONOUR SIR FRANCIS PIGGOTT (CHIEF JUSTICE).
THE PEAK MURDER.
against Kwok Leung, Li Shek Chung and Hung The hearing of the capital charge preferred Hoi was concluded before his Lordship and a jury composed of Messrs. T. P. Hall (foreman), H. J. van der Bosch, J. P. Ulderup, D. A. Purves, H. Reeves, H. E. Craddock and H. A. Lammert. The Hon. Mr. W. Rees Davies, K.C., At- torney-General, who was instructed by Mr. Dennys, Jr., from the office of the Crown Solicitor, appeared for the Crown, the prisoners being defended by Mr. H. G. Calthrop, who was in- structed by Mr. R. D. Atkinson (of Messrs. Deacon, Looker and Deacon).
Mr. Calthrop, on the conclusion of the evidence, addressed the Jury on behalf of the prisoners. After dealing at length with the evidence he remarked that two stories had been put forward: one that somebody put his foot on deceased's clothes; and the other that a man