TNAG-0487-FCO40-552-Review-of-death-sentence-in-Hong-Kong-1974 — Page 108

鬼

3-

his life must have been great. A large number of the deceased's ribs were broken; some of them pierced his lungs causing blood to flow into the chest cavity; this, it was said, would have caused death within a further hour or so had he not vomited from pain and shock and so choked himself. I doubt there was any long-term premeditation to kill on the part of any of those concerned in the attack upon the deceased as the means employed for disposing

There must, of the body was amateurish and showed signs of haste. however, have been an intention to do grievous harm and the mode employed in doing it was of a kind inherently dangerous to life. It is of course impossible to allocate in the least degree individual blows to individual attackers. One very unpleasant

feature of the attack on the deceased was that there were intermissions in it during which he was given water and other refreshment before being beaten again. The beating was thus purposeful and sadistic.

CHAU Cheuk-yin in evidence admitted only to punching the deceased on the chin a few times. LAI Fai said that he only gave the deceased a push, having injured his knuckles (as seems to have been the case), according to him in striking at YEUNG Lin-shing and hitting the wall. WAN Hui-mui as I have said did not give evidence; in a statement which she made to the police she allcged that she had tried to restrain others from beating the deceased and YEUNG Lin-shing; she stated that she had hit one of them on the ankle with the leg of a chair; it was argued that the phrase she used in this connection meant that this had occurred accidentally. LIU Sim-shun alleged that he only gave the deceased three blows on the upper arm. The jury of four Chinese and three European men clearly took the view that all four accused were parties to an extremely fierce attack upon the deceased. I see no reason at all to disagree with their view in relation to any of these four

accused.

I see scarcely any itigating factor in this case. Should Your Excellency take a different view I would suggest a term of 18 years imprisonment in the case of cach accused.

E.G. Baber

(E.G. Baber)

Commissioner of the Supreme Court.