TNAG-0487-FCO40-552-Review-of-death-sentence-in-Hong-Kong-1974 — Page 189

BETWEEN

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 811 OF 1973

ANNEX10 XCR(74) 4 ́ ́

CHAN CHEONG HING

and

THE QUEEN

Coram: Huggins, McMullin & Leonard, JiJo

Huggins, J.

JUDGMENT

Appellant

Respondent

This is an application for leave to appeal against a

conviction on a charge of murder. Counsel who appears for the

Applicant has informed us that he can find no ground upon which

he can base an argument that the verdict was wrong.

We have,

however, considered this case with some care because of an anxiety

which some of us had about the verdict.

The case arose out of a domestic dispute between husband

and wife. There was a history of domestic trouble and on the day

in question there was clearly an argument between the two parties.

The Applicant admitted in a statement to the police that he had

struck his wife a number of times and had killed her, and his

defence at the trial was provocation. The medical evidence showed

that the wife had been hit at least 16 times and the factors relied

upon for the plea of provocation were particularly that the wife

had at least threatened (as was said in the statement) or had

actually tried (as was said in the evidence of the Applicant) to

destroy the husband's ancestral tablets. It should be mentioned

that the husband is a Chiu Chow and there was evidence that the

ancestral tablets are of particular importance to a Chiu Chow family. The Applicant also alleged that his wife had pinched him and that

she had grabbed his testicles and twisted them. There was medical

evidence to support the first of those allegations, evidence of a mark on his thigh, but there was no medical evidence to support the second allcgation.

Clearly there was evidence upon which the jury could bring in a verdict of not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter on the basis of provocation. The members of this Court, having read