TNAG-0554-FCO40-649-Review-of-death-sentence-in-Hong-Kong-1975 — Page 70

4

It was,

of course, necessary for the jury to be satisfied that each of the Appellants had the required intent.

In their cases that intent had to be an intent common with the

person who actually fired the shot to use extreme violence to

•

effect the escape of all the robbers and the safe transit of

the stolen property to the place where it was to be distributed

among them.

Counsel conceded that there was a common plan to

escape together, but he submits that, that plan having been

frustrated and the robbers having dispersed in different

directions, only those at the scene of the shooting could

possibly be found to have an intent common with the actual killer.

Plausible as this argument may be we do not think it reflects

the realities of the situation. It rust always be a matter of

degree whether events which have intervened to frustrate the

plans of conspirators have brought their common intention to an

end and, as such, it is a matter for the jury. Had the killing occurred in the very early stages of the dispersal it is unlikely that anyone would have doubted that the common intent continued, while if the killing had occurred on the following day it is unlikely that anyone would have contended that the common intent was still in being. Between thore two extremos lies an infinity of possible combinations of circumstances, and we are unable to say that it was not open to the jury in the present case to find that the death of the police sergeant was in pursuance of a common intent to employ such violence as might be necessary, including the use of firearms, in order to effect the escape of all the robbers and the conveyance of the money to the Valley Road Estate. Counsel emphasised that one of the robbers threw away his knife after the dispersal had taken place and suggested that he at least could not thereafter have had the common intent. We think that the throwing away of a knife did not of itself prevent this man's being associated with the shooting even though the shooting occurred. later. Had he immediately surrendered to the police the position would no doubt have been different, for that would have demonstrated his wish to dissociate himself from any continuance of the common plan. There might have been a difference between throwing away a knife and throwing away a pistol, but it is sufficient that a robber could throw away the knife while still intending that those armed with pistols should use them. The seventh Defendant asserted

→