TNAG-1213-FCO40-1516-Crimes-and-sentences-in-Hong-Kong--including-death-sentences-1982 — Page 97

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