http://legalref.judiciary.gov.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=95942&currpage=T
HCMA 258 / 2014 - 香港特別行政區 訴 陳柏年大律師
判案日期: 2014年11月25日
主審法官: 高等法院原訟法庭法官馮驊
裁判官指上訴人 [陳柏年大律師] 的行為令人厭惡... 上訴人 [陳柏年大律師] 不讓座這不合理、不文明行為...
2014年11月27日 星期四
朱經緯警司無故揮警棍一嘢摳香港市民後頸 - Superintendent of Police Franklin Chu (Chu King Wai) Hit the Back of a Hong Kong Citizen's Neck with a Baton for No Reason
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=361095350737264
警察為阻止亞皆老街十字路口被重佔，可謂採取「焦土策略」，封鎖全部行人過路處，更以武力驅散行人路上的市民。
期間DBC拍得一名警司，以警棍直接攻擊一名市民，現場所見該名男子有按警員指示離開，亦未有作出挑釁或衝擊行為。
行過就可以打？請問點解釋？
May we ask whether the Hong Kong Police is entitled to assault the back of a citizen's neck just because he "walked pass" the Police peacefully?
http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/realtime/news/20141127/53171252
一名警司更亂揮警棍驅散完全無武器無反抗、已按指示向前行的的市民，市民驚慌失措，有男子更被打中後頸，該男子事後大鬧該警司，高呼無辜，強調只是路過。
http://news.sina.com.hk/news/20141128/-2-3492817/1.html
旺角兩個月來多次爆發警民衝突，有傳媒斥責警方涉嫌使用過量武力，令警民關係進一步惡化。 報道指根據《警察通例》第29章「武力與槍械的使用」規定，警務人員在可行範圍內，應盡量讓對方有機會服從警方命令，然後才可使用武力。所使用的武力必須是為達到目的而須使用的最低程度武力，而達到目的後，須立即停止使用。
報道又提及連日來在旺角帶隊的沙田警區指揮官朱經緯警司，前晚在彌敦道維持秩序期間，突然用警棍從後毆打行人路上全無反抗能力的男女群眾，途人被嚇得急步離開。當時身穿白衫警服的朱經緯，用警棍從後連續打了一名身穿西裝的男子肩部兩下，男子面露痛苦表情，卻不敢反抗繼續急步離去。隨後一名黑衣男子被便衣警員從後推倒在地，黑衣男未有反抗，站起身離開，朱經緯又在他肚上打了一棍。
而被打頸的男子事後在facebook上投訴，中了兩棍一腳，直言「不如旺角宵禁啦，出街都唔畀」。警方昨晚發聲明回應指，非常關注一名警務人員在旺角執行職務時涉嫌不恰當使用武力，警方已主動跟進，有關警員將停止參與相關行動。
http://www.e123.hk/ElderlyPro/details/365519/71/
http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1650232/police-slammed-over-violence-mong-kok
(South China Morning Post, 28 November 2014)
Police slammed over Mong Kok violence after video of officer hitting peaceful protesters emerges.
Protesters complain of officers punching, kicking and smacking them on the head with batons during operation to clear Mong Kok.
警察為阻止亞皆老街十字路口被重佔，可謂採取「焦土策略」，封鎖全部行人過路處，更以武力驅散行人路上的市民。
期間DBC拍得一名警司，以警棍直接攻擊一名市民，現場所見該名男子有按警員指示離開，亦未有作出挑釁或衝擊行為。
行過就可以打？請問點解釋？
May we ask whether the Hong Kong Police is entitled to assault the back of a citizen's neck just because he "walked pass" the Police peacefully?
http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/realtime/news/20141127/53171252
一名警司更亂揮警棍驅散完全無武器無反抗、已按指示向前行的的市民，市民驚慌失措，有男子更被打中後頸，該男子事後大鬧該警司，高呼無辜，強調只是路過。
http://news.sina.com.hk/news/20141128/-2-3492817/1.html
旺角兩個月來多次爆發警民衝突，有傳媒斥責警方涉嫌使用過量武力，令警民關係進一步惡化。 報道指根據《警察通例》第29章「武力與槍械的使用」規定，警務人員在可行範圍內，應盡量讓對方有機會服從警方命令，然後才可使用武力。所使用的武力必須是為達到目的而須使用的最低程度武力，而達到目的後，須立即停止使用。
報道又提及連日來在旺角帶隊的沙田警區指揮官朱經緯警司，前晚在彌敦道維持秩序期間，突然用警棍從後毆打行人路上全無反抗能力的男女群眾，途人被嚇得急步離開。當時身穿白衫警服的朱經緯，用警棍從後連續打了一名身穿西裝的男子肩部兩下，男子面露痛苦表情，卻不敢反抗繼續急步離去。隨後一名黑衣男子被便衣警員從後推倒在地，黑衣男未有反抗，站起身離開，朱經緯又在他肚上打了一棍。
而被打頸的男子事後在facebook上投訴，中了兩棍一腳，直言「不如旺角宵禁啦，出街都唔畀」。警方昨晚發聲明回應指，非常關注一名警務人員在旺角執行職務時涉嫌不恰當使用武力，警方已主動跟進，有關警員將停止參與相關行動。
http://www.e123.hk/ElderlyPro/details/365519/71/
http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1650232/police-slammed-over-violence-mong-kok
(South China Morning Post, 28 November 2014)
Police slammed over Mong Kok violence after video of officer hitting peaceful protesters emerges.
Protesters complain of officers punching, kicking and smacking them on the head with batons during operation to clear Mong Kok.
2014年11月25日 星期二
楊潤康律師包攬訴訟案上訴庭加重刑罰楊潤康律師被勒令即時入獄服刑 - SOLICITOR YEONG YUN HONG GARY JAILED FOR CHAMPERTY
http://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20141125/bkn-20141125135948119-1125_00822_001.html
楊潤康律師包攬訴訟案上訴庭裁定加重刑罰，楊潤康律師被勒令楊即時入獄服刑。
葉漢明與楊潤康在今年4月分別被區院裁定26項和25項包攬訴訟罪罪成，當中葉被判監12個月，但獲維緩刑18月；楊被判囚15個月，但獲緩刑24個月。上訴庭指原審法官犯錯及判刑過輕，於是改判葉入獄26個月，楊判監38個月。
案情指，葉漢明聯同楊潤康於2001至2007年期間向意外受傷索償客戶聲稱「不成功不收費」，事後攤分20多名客戶所得賠償，因而被控包攬訴訟罪。
楊潤康律師包攬訴訟案上訴庭裁定加重刑罰，楊潤康律師被勒令楊即時入獄服刑。
葉漢明與楊潤康在今年4月分別被區院裁定26項和25項包攬訴訟罪罪成，當中葉被判監12個月，但獲維緩刑18月；楊被判囚15個月，但獲緩刑24個月。上訴庭指原審法官犯錯及判刑過輕，於是改判葉入獄26個月，楊判監38個月。
案情指，葉漢明聯同楊潤康於2001至2007年期間向意外受傷索償客戶聲稱「不成功不收費」，事後攤分20多名客戶所得賠償，因而被控包攬訴訟罪。
骨科專科醫生楊樂賢和兒科專科醫生被投訴不適當診斷 - Improper Diagnosis Complaints Lodged Against Orthopaedist Dr Michael Yeung Lok Yin and Paediatrician Dr Lillian Ko Yang Yang
Improper Diagnosis Complaints Lodged Against Doctors (Orthopaedist Dr Michael Yeung Lok Yin and Paediatrician Dr Lillian Ko Yang Yang) - 骨科專科醫生楊樂賢和兒科專科醫生高楊揚被投訴不適當診斷
http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1647863/doctors-accused-improperly-diagnosing-teen-metal-toxicity
(25 November 2014) (South China Morning Post)
http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1647863/doctors-accused-improperly-diagnosing-teen-metal-toxicity
(25 November 2014) (South China Morning Post)
The Medical Council is considering allegations that two doctors improperly diagnosed a teen with allergies and heavy-metal toxicity, and prescribed unnecessary treatment.
The allegations were against orthopaedist Dr Michael Yeung Lok-yin and paediatrician Dr Lillian Ko Yang Yang, who treated teenager Patient X in 2005.
Patient X's mother, Madame A, said her son had been threatened with expulsion by his school over a suspected behavioural disorder.
After inconclusive meetings with school psychologists, Madame A found information online on linkages between behavioural problems and metal toxicity. She approached Yeung, hoping for proof Patient X had special needs due to his illness and should not be expelled.
Madame A said Yeung diagnosed her son with "multiple allergies syndrome" without any tests, and with heavy metal toxicity via hair analysis only. Yeung referred him to Ko. Ko also diagnosed metal toxicity, and suggested a one-year detoxification plan for the teen, along with visual therapy from Ko's husband, also a medical practitioner.
The disciplinary inquiry continues on Thursday.
____________________________________
2003年曾發表報告，指海產是導致港人慢性水銀中毒的骨科專科醫生楊樂賢和兒科專科醫生高楊揚，再被投訴不適當診斷一名有學習問題的少年X重金屬中毒，處方磁場治療和排毒法等另類療法，其中高只為X進行過一次簡單檢查，卻收費7,000元。醫委會昨聆訊，X的母親在庭上說，求醫只為找出兒子行為問題的原因，避免孩子被踢出校。重金屬中毒問題困擾不少父母，坊間亦出現不同的體內水銀檢驗方法，以及不同排毒治療方案，但醫學界對這類檢測和治療一直存疑。X的個案是醫委會首次就與重金屬中毒相關的另類治療進行紀律聆訊。
建議驗頭髮測水銀
X的母親A女士昨日作供時指，2005年兒子在校內有行為問題，兩名教育心理學家先後替他檢查後，沒有結論，學校想將X踢出校，A為求證明兒子的行為出於疾病，上網搜尋資料，發現楊是香港有毒金屬醫學會會員，遂向楊求醫。
2005年7至9月期間X向楊求診四次，當時楊在未有任何依據下，指X有多種敏感症狀，包括流鼻水、抽筋和濕疹等，但又建議替X進行頭髮測試檢驗水銀水平，並施以磁場治療（magnetic field therapy）。A說，當時楊在她沒有要求下，將X轉介予高楊揚，而楊僅將頭髮測試報告的首頁交予A，其餘數頁報告不翼而飛。
A說，由於楊一直拒絕為X撰寫醫生信，她惟有帶兒子向高楊揚求診。高替X診斷時，只簡單進行身體和機能發展檢查，就指X與重金屬中毒有關，須進行排毒治療（detoxification），並建議將X轉介至高楊揚丈夫高世昌醫生進行視覺訓練。單於該此診症，高向A收取7,000元，「當時我要立刻去銀行提款，又要聯絡喺外國嘅丈夫」。
A對楊和高的診治存疑，其後停止向他們求診，並向消委會投訴但不果，遂於2006年轉向醫委會投訴。楊樂賢和高楊揚分別有四項和兩項控罪。控方在庭上讀出楊、高二人的書面辯解，包括楊辯稱當年只是替X治療感冒，A在庭上表明不同意有關言論。
投訴至今八年間遇上不少波折，單在醫委會初步偵訊委員會已花三年處理，2006年中大內科教授陳恩強獲邀作專家證人，先後撰寫四份報告，其後卻因身份有偏頗要退出聆訊。控方再請來中毒諮詢中心總監劉飛龍和中大兒科系主任梁廷勳任專家證人。辯方昨又要求休庭，直至辯方專家重新撰寫不受陳恩強意見影響的報告。醫委會終批准辯方明年3月10日提交新的專家報告，但事實證人的A可繼續作供。聆訊本周四再續。
2014年11月23日 星期日
王則左大律師被舊客戶入稟高等法院民事索償 - Barrister Samuel CC Wong Sued by Former Client in the High Court
Lawyer Samuel CC Wong Sued by Former Client in the High Court - 王則左大律師被舊客戶入稟高等法院民事索償
Before: Deputy High Court Judge Carlson in Chambers
Date of Hearing: 12 April 2006
Date of Judgment (Handed Down): 3 May 2006
"... 21. ... what it really boils down to is the complaint that the 1st Defendant [Barrister Lawyer & Counsel Samuel CC Wong - 王則左大律師], by accepting instructions from the Plaintiff knowingly placed himself in a situation where his own personal interest (through the 2nd Defendant) conflicted with that of his client. They were both at the time “competing” with each other to be compensated by OLS. Whoever got to the winning post first, in terms of executing its judgment, achieved an enormous advantage, as in fact happened for the 2nd Defendant."
(Source 1: http://www.hklii.hk/eng/hk/cases/hkcfi/2006/445.html)
(Source 2: http://legalref.judiciary.gov.hk/lrs/common/search/search_result_detail_frame.jsp?DIS=52346&QS=%28wong%2Bchat%2Bchor%29&TP=JU)
HCA 1508/2004
____________
BETWEEN
BRILLIANT (MAN SAU) ENGINEERING LIMITED (Plaintiff)
and
WONG CHAT CHOR, SAMUEL (1st Defendant)
CHINA TOP CONSULTANTS LIMITED (2nd Defendant)
____________
Date of Hearing: 12 April 2006
Date of Judgment (Handed Down): 3 May 2006
"... 21. ... what it really boils down to is the complaint that the 1st Defendant [Barrister Lawyer & Counsel Samuel CC Wong - 王則左大律師], by accepting instructions from the Plaintiff knowingly placed himself in a situation where his own personal interest (through the 2nd Defendant) conflicted with that of his client. They were both at the time “competing” with each other to be compensated by OLS. Whoever got to the winning post first, in terms of executing its judgment, achieved an enormous advantage, as in fact happened for the 2nd Defendant."
(Source 1: http://www.hklii.hk/eng/hk/cases/hkcfi/2006/445.html)
(Source 2: http://legalref.judiciary.gov.hk/lrs/common/search/search_result_detail_frame.jsp?DIS=52346&QS=%28wong%2Bchat%2Bchor%29&TP=JU)
2014年11月20日 星期四
Solicitors T K Cheng and C H Kwong Guilty of Professional Misconduct - 律師鄭子駒及鄺志豪專業失當罪成被罰
http://www.hk-lawyer.org/en/article.asp?articleid=2478&c=121
Cheng Tze Kui (“1st Respondent”) and Kwong Chi Ho (“2nd Respondent”), formerly, the partners of Messrs. T.K. Cheng & Co. (a closed firm) (the “Firm”)
Hearing Date: 11 March and 2 July 2014
Findings and Order: 6 August 2014
Having considered the Affidavit filed by the Law Society and the exhibits thereto and given the admission of the 1st Respondent to the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Complaints, the admission of the 2nd Respondent to the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Complaints and the 1st and 2nd Respondents’ Agreed Facts, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (“Tribunal”) found the 1st Respondent guilty of the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Complaints while the 2nd Respondent guilty of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Complaints.
The Complaints laid against the 1st and 2nd Respondents are as follows:
First Complaint
(against 1st Respondent)
Breach of Rule 2(e) of the Solicitors’ Practice Rules (“SPR”) in that the 1st Respondent had repeatedly failed to deliver the Accountant’s Reports of the Firm within the stipulated time to the Law Society in years 2004, 2005, 2007 and 2009 which compromised or impaired or was likely to compromise or impair a proper standard of work.
Second Complaint
(against 2nd Respondent)
Breach of Rule 2(e) of the SPR in that the 2nd Respondent had repeatedly failed to deliver the Accountant’s Reports of the Firm within the stipulated time to the Law Society in years 2007 and 2009 which compromised or impaired or was likely to compromise or impair a proper standard of work.
Third Complaint
(against 1st and 2nd Respondents)
Breach of Section 8(1) of the Legal Practitioners Ordinance in that the 1st and 2nd Respondents had failed to deliver the Firm’s 2009–2010 Accountant’s Report to the Law Society within the stipulated time in 2010.
Fourth Complaint
(against 1st and 2nd Respondents)
Breach of Rule 10(1) and 10(2) of the Solicitors’ Accounts Rules (“SAR”) in that the 1st and 2nd Respondents had failed to keep properly written up books and accounts of the Firm’s client accounts from September 2010 to May2011.
Fifth Complaint
(against 1st and 2nd Respondents)
Breach of Rule 10A of the SAR in that the 1st and 2nd Respondents had failed to prepare reconciliations of client accounts of all the bank accounts of the Firm from September 2010 to May 2011 save for one of the Firm’s banks for the months of August and September 2010 and for the Firm’s other bank for the month of August 2010.
Sixth Complaint
(against 1st and 2nd Respondents)
Breach of Rule 11 of the SAR in that the 1st and 2nd Respondents had from December 2010 to May 2011 failed to produce to the Monitoring Accountants appointed by the Council of the Law Society (the “Council”) the Firm’s books and accounts for their inspection when they visited the Firm at the direction of the Council on 11 January, 18 April and 3May 2011.
And upon hearing the mitigation submissions made on behalf of the 1st and 2nd Respondents, the Tribunal ordered, inter alia, that:
In respect of the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Complaints, the 1st Respondent be censured; and fined with a sum of HK$30,000, together with a condition imposed on him whereby he may not practise as a sole practitioner or in any partnership for a period of 2 years from the date of the Order (6 August 2014);
In respect of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Complaints, the 2nd Respondent be fined with a sum of HK$30,000; and
Costs of these proceedings, including the costs of the Law Society, the Prosecutor and the Clerk to the Tribunal, to be paid by the 1st and 2nd Respondents and to be taxed on a party-and-party basis, if not agreed.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.hk-lawyer.org/tc/article.asp?articleid=2478&c=121
鄭子駒律師(下稱「第一答辯人」)及鄺志豪律師(下稱「第二答辯人」) 前為鄭子駒律師行(已結業) (下稱「該律師行」)合夥人
聆訊日期： 2014年3月11日及7月2日
裁斷及命令： 2014年8月6日
考慮過律師會提交的誓章連證物，並鑑於第一答辯人就第一、第三、第四、第五和第六項申訴認罪，第二答辯人就第二、第三、第四、第五和第六項申訴認罪，以及經第一及第二答辯人議定的事實，律師紀律審裁組(下稱「審裁組」)裁定針對第一答辯人的第一、第三、第四、第五和第六項申訴成立，及針對第二答辯人的第二、第三、第四、第五和第六項申訴成立。
針對第一及第二答辯人的申訴如下：
第一項申訴(針對第一答辯人)
第一答辯人在2004、2005、2007和2009年多次未能在指定時間內向律師會提交該律師行的會計師報告，危及或損害了或相當可能危及或損害了適當的工作標準，因此違反《律師執業規則》第2(e)條規則。
第二項申訴(針對第二答辯人)
第二答辯人在2007和2009年多次未能在指定時間內向律師會提交該律師行的會計師報告，危及或損害了或相當可能危及或損害了適當的工作標準，因此違反《律師執業規則》第2(e)條規則。
第三項申訴(針對第一及第二答辯人)
第一及第二答辯人在2010年未能在指定時間內向律師會提交該律師行2009年至2010年度的會計師報告，因此違反《法律執業者條例》第8(1)條。
第四項申訴(針對第一及第二答辯人)
第一及第二答辯人在2010年9月至2011年5月期間未有為該律師行的當事人帳戶備存妥為詳細記敘的簿冊及帳目，因此違反《律師帳目規則》第10(1)及10(2)條規則。
第五項申訴(針對第一及第二答辯人)
第一及第二答辯人在2010年9月至2011年5月期間，未有為該律師行所有銀行帳戶的當事人帳戶擬備對帳表(2010年8月及9月份該律師行使用的其中一間銀行，及2010年8月份該律師行使用的另一間銀行除外)，因此違反《律師帳目規則》第10A條規則。
第六項申訴(針對第一及第二答辯人)
第一及第二答辯人在2010年12月至2011年5月期間，在律師會理事會委任的監察會計師依照理事會指示在2011年1月11日、4月18日和5月3日探訪該律師行時，未能出示該律師行的簿冊及帳目以供監察會計師查閱，因此違反《律師帳目規則》第11條規則。
經聽取代表第一及第二答辯人作出的請求輕判陳詞後，審裁組作出命令，其中包括︰
就第一、第三、第四、第五和第六項申訴，對第一答辯人施以譴責；及處以罰款30,000港元，並對他施加以下條件：由本命令作出之日起(2014年8月6日)不可以獨營執業者或合夥形式執業，為期2年；
就第二、第三、第四、第五和第六項申訴，對第二答辯人處以罰款30,000港元；及
第一及第二答辯人須承擔此等法律程序的費用，包括律師會、檢控人員及審裁組書記的費用，而費用按訴訟各方對評基準評定。
Cheng Tze Kui (“1st Respondent”) and Kwong Chi Ho (“2nd Respondent”), formerly, the partners of Messrs. T.K. Cheng & Co. (a closed firm) (the “Firm”)
Hearing Date: 11 March and 2 July 2014
Findings and Order: 6 August 2014
Having considered the Affidavit filed by the Law Society and the exhibits thereto and given the admission of the 1st Respondent to the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Complaints, the admission of the 2nd Respondent to the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Complaints and the 1st and 2nd Respondents’ Agreed Facts, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (“Tribunal”) found the 1st Respondent guilty of the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Complaints while the 2nd Respondent guilty of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Complaints.
The Complaints laid against the 1st and 2nd Respondents are as follows:
First Complaint
(against 1st Respondent)
Breach of Rule 2(e) of the Solicitors’ Practice Rules (“SPR”) in that the 1st Respondent had repeatedly failed to deliver the Accountant’s Reports of the Firm within the stipulated time to the Law Society in years 2004, 2005, 2007 and 2009 which compromised or impaired or was likely to compromise or impair a proper standard of work.
Second Complaint
(against 2nd Respondent)
Breach of Rule 2(e) of the SPR in that the 2nd Respondent had repeatedly failed to deliver the Accountant’s Reports of the Firm within the stipulated time to the Law Society in years 2007 and 2009 which compromised or impaired or was likely to compromise or impair a proper standard of work.
Third Complaint
(against 1st and 2nd Respondents)
Breach of Section 8(1) of the Legal Practitioners Ordinance in that the 1st and 2nd Respondents had failed to deliver the Firm’s 2009–2010 Accountant’s Report to the Law Society within the stipulated time in 2010.
Fourth Complaint
(against 1st and 2nd Respondents)
Breach of Rule 10(1) and 10(2) of the Solicitors’ Accounts Rules (“SAR”) in that the 1st and 2nd Respondents had failed to keep properly written up books and accounts of the Firm’s client accounts from September 2010 to May2011.
Fifth Complaint
(against 1st and 2nd Respondents)
Breach of Rule 10A of the SAR in that the 1st and 2nd Respondents had failed to prepare reconciliations of client accounts of all the bank accounts of the Firm from September 2010 to May 2011 save for one of the Firm’s banks for the months of August and September 2010 and for the Firm’s other bank for the month of August 2010.
Sixth Complaint
(against 1st and 2nd Respondents)
Breach of Rule 11 of the SAR in that the 1st and 2nd Respondents had from December 2010 to May 2011 failed to produce to the Monitoring Accountants appointed by the Council of the Law Society (the “Council”) the Firm’s books and accounts for their inspection when they visited the Firm at the direction of the Council on 11 January, 18 April and 3May 2011.
And upon hearing the mitigation submissions made on behalf of the 1st and 2nd Respondents, the Tribunal ordered, inter alia, that:
In respect of the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Complaints, the 1st Respondent be censured; and fined with a sum of HK$30,000, together with a condition imposed on him whereby he may not practise as a sole practitioner or in any partnership for a period of 2 years from the date of the Order (6 August 2014);
In respect of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Complaints, the 2nd Respondent be fined with a sum of HK$30,000; and
Costs of these proceedings, including the costs of the Law Society, the Prosecutor and the Clerk to the Tribunal, to be paid by the 1st and 2nd Respondents and to be taxed on a party-and-party basis, if not agreed.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.hk-lawyer.org/tc/article.asp?articleid=2478&c=121
鄭子駒律師(下稱「第一答辯人」)及鄺志豪律師(下稱「第二答辯人」) 前為鄭子駒律師行(已結業) (下稱「該律師行」)合夥人
聆訊日期： 2014年3月11日及7月2日
裁斷及命令： 2014年8月6日
考慮過律師會提交的誓章連證物，並鑑於第一答辯人就第一、第三、第四、第五和第六項申訴認罪，第二答辯人就第二、第三、第四、第五和第六項申訴認罪，以及經第一及第二答辯人議定的事實，律師紀律審裁組(下稱「審裁組」)裁定針對第一答辯人的第一、第三、第四、第五和第六項申訴成立，及針對第二答辯人的第二、第三、第四、第五和第六項申訴成立。
針對第一及第二答辯人的申訴如下：
第一項申訴(針對第一答辯人)
第一答辯人在2004、2005、2007和2009年多次未能在指定時間內向律師會提交該律師行的會計師報告，危及或損害了或相當可能危及或損害了適當的工作標準，因此違反《律師執業規則》第2(e)條規則。
第二項申訴(針對第二答辯人)
第二答辯人在2007和2009年多次未能在指定時間內向律師會提交該律師行的會計師報告，危及或損害了或相當可能危及或損害了適當的工作標準，因此違反《律師執業規則》第2(e)條規則。
第三項申訴(針對第一及第二答辯人)
第一及第二答辯人在2010年未能在指定時間內向律師會提交該律師行2009年至2010年度的會計師報告，因此違反《法律執業者條例》第8(1)條。
第四項申訴(針對第一及第二答辯人)
第一及第二答辯人在2010年9月至2011年5月期間未有為該律師行的當事人帳戶備存妥為詳細記敘的簿冊及帳目，因此違反《律師帳目規則》第10(1)及10(2)條規則。
第五項申訴(針對第一及第二答辯人)
第一及第二答辯人在2010年9月至2011年5月期間，未有為該律師行所有銀行帳戶的當事人帳戶擬備對帳表(2010年8月及9月份該律師行使用的其中一間銀行，及2010年8月份該律師行使用的另一間銀行除外)，因此違反《律師帳目規則》第10A條規則。
第六項申訴(針對第一及第二答辯人)
第一及第二答辯人在2010年12月至2011年5月期間，在律師會理事會委任的監察會計師依照理事會指示在2011年1月11日、4月18日和5月3日探訪該律師行時，未能出示該律師行的簿冊及帳目以供監察會計師查閱，因此違反《律師帳目規則》第11條規則。
經聽取代表第一及第二答辯人作出的請求輕判陳詞後，審裁組作出命令，其中包括︰
就第一、第三、第四、第五和第六項申訴，對第一答辯人施以譴責；及處以罰款30,000港元，並對他施加以下條件：由本命令作出之日起(2014年8月6日)不可以獨營執業者或合夥形式執業，為期2年；
就第二、第三、第四、第五和第六項申訴，對第二答辯人處以罰款30,000港元；及
第一及第二答辯人須承擔此等法律程序的費用，包括律師會、檢控人員及審裁組書記的費用，而費用按訴訟各方對評基準評定。
一代影壇猛人向華勝病逝北京 - Heung Wa Sing Died in Beijing Aged 64
http://news.sina.com.hk/news/20141121/-2-3479413/1.html?cf=news-sbHottest
(星島日報2014年11月21日報道)
曾投資拍過《賭神》、《逃學威龍》、《唐伯虎點秋香》等多部賣座電影的永盛電影公司老闆向華勝，早前患上食道癌末期，曾多次傳出病情不穩，但後經其太太端木櫻子證實他一直在北京醫院休養，情況穩定。但昨晚又突然傳出向華勝在北京病逝的消息，後經向華勝兄長向華強的太太陳嵐證實，向華勝於昨晚七時病逝，終年六十四歲。
曾於八十年代叱咤香港影壇的永盛電影公司老闆向華勝，因為食道癌引致器官衰竭，於昨晚七時在北京協和醫院逝世，享年六十四歲，太太端木櫻子一直陪伴在側。
據知自向華勝得知患了這個病後，其小他二十二歲的妻子端木櫻子一直四處求助名醫，他的兄姊亦先後到過北京探望，及後其病情一度穩定下來，更離開加護病房轉為一般病房繼續治療。但近日情況又再惡化，向華勝和太太亦已有心理準備。向華勝臨走前，曾表示此生無憾，只是記掛太太，但其妻叫他放心，定會好好照顧自己。目前其太太已在北京為向華勝做法事，數天後就會辦理有關手續。
中國星公司的發言人李小姐向記者表示，其老闆向華強今日會飛到北京協助辦理弟弟的後事，而向氏兩兄弟一直感情深厚，故向華強深感悲痛，至於會否舉行追思會等，要留待與家人商討後再作決定。
曾經與向華勝合作的電影監製田啟文，指向生是電影投資者的典範，之前他試過看自己有份投資電影的午夜場，為力求完美，第二日即時要求補戲，他絕對是帶動電影圈進步的人。
向華勝八十年代在香港電影界叱咤一時，投資眼光準繩，拍過不少賣座電影屢破票房紀錄，更捧紅過如周星馳、張敏等紅，亦與周潤發、劉德華合作無間。
感情路上，也有過四段情，早年與無綫藝員張美玲結婚，婚後數年離異。及後有傳與女星張敏過從甚密，成了其公司的御用女主角，惜後來無疾而終。而在一九九八年與張玉珊拍拖，共譜一段相差二十年的忘年戀，但最終還是沒有結果。
直至五十七歲那年與來自北京的端木櫻子戀情曝光，拍拖兩年後結成夫妻。今年突傳出他患上癌症，一直與癌魔搏鬥，更有說他太太曾求助活佛，可惜最後仍敵不過癌魔而病逝。
(星島日報2014年11月21日報道)
曾投資拍過《賭神》、《逃學威龍》、《唐伯虎點秋香》等多部賣座電影的永盛電影公司老闆向華勝，早前患上食道癌末期，曾多次傳出病情不穩，但後經其太太端木櫻子證實他一直在北京醫院休養，情況穩定。但昨晚又突然傳出向華勝在北京病逝的消息，後經向華勝兄長向華強的太太陳嵐證實，向華勝於昨晚七時病逝，終年六十四歲。
曾於八十年代叱咤香港影壇的永盛電影公司老闆向華勝，因為食道癌引致器官衰竭，於昨晚七時在北京協和醫院逝世，享年六十四歲，太太端木櫻子一直陪伴在側。
據知自向華勝得知患了這個病後，其小他二十二歲的妻子端木櫻子一直四處求助名醫，他的兄姊亦先後到過北京探望，及後其病情一度穩定下來，更離開加護病房轉為一般病房繼續治療。但近日情況又再惡化，向華勝和太太亦已有心理準備。向華勝臨走前，曾表示此生無憾，只是記掛太太，但其妻叫他放心，定會好好照顧自己。目前其太太已在北京為向華勝做法事，數天後就會辦理有關手續。
中國星公司的發言人李小姐向記者表示，其老闆向華強今日會飛到北京協助辦理弟弟的後事，而向氏兩兄弟一直感情深厚，故向華強深感悲痛，至於會否舉行追思會等，要留待與家人商討後再作決定。
曾經與向華勝合作的電影監製田啟文，指向生是電影投資者的典範，之前他試過看自己有份投資電影的午夜場，為力求完美，第二日即時要求補戲，他絕對是帶動電影圈進步的人。
向華勝八十年代在香港電影界叱咤一時，投資眼光準繩，拍過不少賣座電影屢破票房紀錄，更捧紅過如周星馳、張敏等紅，亦與周潤發、劉德華合作無間。
感情路上，也有過四段情，早年與無綫藝員張美玲結婚，婚後數年離異。及後有傳與女星張敏過從甚密，成了其公司的御用女主角，惜後來無疾而終。而在一九九八年與張玉珊拍拖，共譜一段相差二十年的忘年戀，但最終還是沒有結果。
直至五十七歲那年與來自北京的端木櫻子戀情曝光，拍拖兩年後結成夫妻。今年突傳出他患上癌症，一直與癌魔搏鬥，更有說他太太曾求助活佛，可惜最後仍敵不過癌魔而病逝。
2014年11月5日 星期三
Rafael Hui Trial Revealed Rotten Heart of Hong Kong Government, Says Prosecutor David Perry QC
http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1632609/rafael-hui-trial-revealed-rotten-heart-hong-kong-government-says
The heart of Hong Kong government was “rotten” when former chief secretary Rafael Hui Si-yan pocketed multimillion-dollar bribes from billionaire property developers, prosecutors said as they began wrapping up one of the city’s biggest ever graft trials today.
Starting a four-day closing submission summing up more than 100 days of evidence, lead prosecutor David Perry QC said it was a “simple case of misconduct in public office” by Hui.
The actions of the co-defendants, Sun Hung Kai Properties co-chairmen and brothers Thomas Kwok Ping-kwong and Raymond Kwok Ping-luen, bore “all the hallmarks of bribery”.
“There was something rotten at the heart of the government of Hong Kong,” said Perry. “[Hui] put his own private interest before his public duty. It is about collusion between business and government.
“The prosecution has to say with regret that the defendants have told lies,” he added.
Perry said Hui’s earlier role as managing director of the Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Authority (MPFA) was also “hopelessly compromised” because of his “divided loyalty”.
The prosecutor asked the nine jurors not to judge Hui morally in the face of evidence about his luxurious lifestyle and spending sprees.
“He needed money to fund his immoderate and luxurious lifestyle – that’s not a criticism, that’s not a moral judgment,” Perry said.
Hui “is not on trial for his love of gourmet food, fine wine or companionship of women,” the prosecutor added.
Hui and Thomas Kwok had testified that the alleged bribes were part of a secret oral agreement made with Hui stipulating that HK$30 million be paid for two years’ consultancy between 2003 and 2005.
But Perry said: “The oral agreement is a fictitious invention of the defendants, a convenient attempt to explain away what was a bribe.”
Hui “abused” his public office, Perry said. “He was not candid, he was not truthful, he was not open about his relationship with the Kwoks ... because he received these bribes.”
He challenged the co-defendants’ testimony that the almost identical sums of money that left the Kwoks and arrived to Hui were coincidental. “An assertion of coincidence is not an explanation; it’s simply taking refuge in the denial of the connection,” he said.
“Each of the defendants, when they found themselves in difficulty, sought sanctuary in the claim of ignorance or absence of knowledge.”
When Hui was head of MPFA, he voted in favour of the public body’s renewal of its office lease in the IFC tower co-managed by SHKP. “Rather than acting with integrity, he deliberately suppressed the truth about his relationship with the Kwoks,” Perry said.
As chief secretary and later a non-official member of the Executive Council, Hui handled the West Kowloon Cultural District project, in which SHKP had an interest.
Hui, 66, faces eight charges related to bribery and misconduct in public office.
Thomas Kwok, 63, faces one charge of conspiracy to offer an advantage to Hui and two counts of conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office.
Raymond Kwok, 61, faces four charges, including one with Hui of furnishing false information. SHKP executive director Thomas Chan Kui-yuen, 68, and former Hong Kong stock exchange official Francis Kwan Hung-sang, 63, each face two charges.
All have pleaded not guilty. The trial continues before Mr Justice Andrew Macrae.
The heart of Hong Kong government was “rotten” when former chief secretary Rafael Hui Si-yan pocketed multimillion-dollar bribes from billionaire property developers, prosecutors said as they began wrapping up one of the city’s biggest ever graft trials today.
Starting a four-day closing submission summing up more than 100 days of evidence, lead prosecutor David Perry QC said it was a “simple case of misconduct in public office” by Hui.
The actions of the co-defendants, Sun Hung Kai Properties co-chairmen and brothers Thomas Kwok Ping-kwong and Raymond Kwok Ping-luen, bore “all the hallmarks of bribery”.
“There was something rotten at the heart of the government of Hong Kong,” said Perry. “[Hui] put his own private interest before his public duty. It is about collusion between business and government.
“The prosecution has to say with regret that the defendants have told lies,” he added.
Perry said Hui’s earlier role as managing director of the Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Authority (MPFA) was also “hopelessly compromised” because of his “divided loyalty”.
The prosecutor asked the nine jurors not to judge Hui morally in the face of evidence about his luxurious lifestyle and spending sprees.
“He needed money to fund his immoderate and luxurious lifestyle – that’s not a criticism, that’s not a moral judgment,” Perry said.
Hui “is not on trial for his love of gourmet food, fine wine or companionship of women,” the prosecutor added.
Hui and Thomas Kwok had testified that the alleged bribes were part of a secret oral agreement made with Hui stipulating that HK$30 million be paid for two years’ consultancy between 2003 and 2005.
But Perry said: “The oral agreement is a fictitious invention of the defendants, a convenient attempt to explain away what was a bribe.”
Hui “abused” his public office, Perry said. “He was not candid, he was not truthful, he was not open about his relationship with the Kwoks ... because he received these bribes.”
He challenged the co-defendants’ testimony that the almost identical sums of money that left the Kwoks and arrived to Hui were coincidental. “An assertion of coincidence is not an explanation; it’s simply taking refuge in the denial of the connection,” he said.
“Each of the defendants, when they found themselves in difficulty, sought sanctuary in the claim of ignorance or absence of knowledge.”
When Hui was head of MPFA, he voted in favour of the public body’s renewal of its office lease in the IFC tower co-managed by SHKP. “Rather than acting with integrity, he deliberately suppressed the truth about his relationship with the Kwoks,” Perry said.
As chief secretary and later a non-official member of the Executive Council, Hui handled the West Kowloon Cultural District project, in which SHKP had an interest.
Hui, 66, faces eight charges related to bribery and misconduct in public office.
Thomas Kwok, 63, faces one charge of conspiracy to offer an advantage to Hui and two counts of conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office.
Raymond Kwok, 61, faces four charges, including one with Hui of furnishing false information. SHKP executive director Thomas Chan Kui-yuen, 68, and former Hong Kong stock exchange official Francis Kwan Hung-sang, 63, each face two charges.
All have pleaded not guilty. The trial continues before Mr Justice Andrew Macrae.
女大狀指鄭紀航裁判官性騷擾 - CHEANG Kei Hong, a magistrate, has been accused of sexual harassment for asking a barrister if she'd had her feet licked
http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=30&art_id=151098&sid=43300601&con_type=1
Wednesday, November 05, 2014
CHEANG Kei Hong, a magistrate, has been accused of sexual harassment for asking a barrister if she'd had her feet licked.
Offended, the barrister has filed reports to Chief Justice Geoffrey Ma Tao-li, chief magistrate Clement Lee Hing-nin and the Equal Opportunities Commission.
The remark came on August 8 at Sha Tin Magistrates court, where an indecent assault case was being heard.
Wan Ho-yeung, a Chinese University of Hong Kong masters student in public health, was accused of licking a female schoolmate's feet at the university library in January.
The case was heard before magistrate Cheang Kei-hong, who questioned 27-year-old Wan about him licking a 20-year-old schoolmate's feet for about a minute after claiming to be a psychology student curious about women's reactions to strange behavior.
When Wan's barrister suggested that the act may not amount to indecent assault, Cheang asked: "Then have you ever tried letting others lick your feet?"
The barrister said she had not.
___________________________________
http://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20141105/bkn-20141105211452612-1105_00822_001.html
女大狀指鄭紀航裁判官性騷擾
沙田裁判法院裁判官鄭紀航，月前審理一宗中大碩士男生涉嫌舔女同學腳底的非禮案時，被指出言反問代表被告的女大狀「咁妳有無試過被人舔腳」，女大狀事後認為有人的言論涉及性騷擾，據稱已向終審法院首席法官馬道立及總裁判官李慶年書面投訴；司法機構發言人指，為保護包括投訴人、被投訴人及其他可能有關人士的個人私隱，司法機構一般不評論個別個案。
Wednesday, November 05, 2014
CHEANG Kei Hong, a magistrate, has been accused of sexual harassment for asking a barrister if she'd had her feet licked.
Offended, the barrister has filed reports to Chief Justice Geoffrey Ma Tao-li, chief magistrate Clement Lee Hing-nin and the Equal Opportunities Commission.
The remark came on August 8 at Sha Tin Magistrates court, where an indecent assault case was being heard.
Wan Ho-yeung, a Chinese University of Hong Kong masters student in public health, was accused of licking a female schoolmate's feet at the university library in January.
The case was heard before magistrate Cheang Kei-hong, who questioned 27-year-old Wan about him licking a 20-year-old schoolmate's feet for about a minute after claiming to be a psychology student curious about women's reactions to strange behavior.
When Wan's barrister suggested that the act may not amount to indecent assault, Cheang asked: "Then have you ever tried letting others lick your feet?"
The barrister said she had not.
___________________________________
http://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20141105/bkn-20141105211452612-1105_00822_001.html
女大狀指鄭紀航裁判官性騷擾
沙田裁判法院裁判官鄭紀航，月前審理一宗中大碩士男生涉嫌舔女同學腳底的非禮案時，被指出言反問代表被告的女大狀「咁妳有無試過被人舔腳」，女大狀事後認為有人的言論涉及性騷擾，據稱已向終審法院首席法官馬道立及總裁判官李慶年書面投訴；司法機構發言人指，為保護包括投訴人、被投訴人及其他可能有關人士的個人私隱，司法機構一般不評論個別個案。
Solicitor Stanley Chan (Chan Wing Leung) Had Once Been Prosecuted and Tried in the High Court - 陳永良律師曾當差在80年代與12名同袍被落案控以毆打、傷人、非法禁錮及串謀妨礙司法公正等六項罪名
http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/news/art/20141105/18924201
【雨傘革命 第39天】
【本報訊】前日有份發起律師默站抗議佔中的新民黨常委陳永良律師，最近以「拯救七俠五義於水深火熱中」之名組織律師團，協助涉於「暗角」毆打示威者的七警。這名撐警律師原來曾當差，更在80年代涉與12名同袍以大鐵鎚揼背脊、灼燒下體等酷刑向疑犯逼供。案件轟動一時，警隊內部稱他們做「十三太保」。陳昨回覆本報查詢稱：「嗰件案已經係過去咗，經過審訊之後，全部罪名不成立。」
記者：張婷婷 林偉聰
陳永良昨出席香港電台節目《千禧年代》時，主持人讀出一段Twitter訊息：「各位放心，我將組成律師團，拯救七俠五義於水深火熱中，已經約好見面，為其提供法律意見。『儆惡懲奸，忠肝義膽』，這八個字從我1974年宣誓入警察學校的第一天，便牢記心中。陳永良律師上。」
陳永良在節目表示，「七俠五義」是有關警員簡稱而已，強調「法律一日未定罪，大家都唔可以話佢哋有罪」。陳永良在前日發起律師默站反佔中後，本報昨收到多個報料，指他於80年代曾與多名警務人員涉嫌向一名毒販濫用私刑，在高院接受審訊，其後獲陪審團裁定無罪，有指涉案的13名警務人員被飭令自動辭職，指陳或因自己當年的經歷，故對七警特別同情.
■七警上月在金鐘清場時涉將佔領人士曾健超帶到暗角毆打，現被停職。
時任副處長要求自動辭職
本報翻查當年的報章報道發現，有關案件發生於1986年9月初，時任高級督察陳永良擔任主管的一隊特別行動組，進行緝毒截查工作時，探員把疑人載往九龍城樂富公園。陳永良曾離開現場，受害人則被人隔着檔案夾，以大鐵鎚打背部、將打火機燒過的金屬物件，灼燒受害人肚腩和下體。兩小時後，警才載受害人返回黃大仙警署扣留。
該名有多次吸毒、行劫案底的受害人作供時曾指陳向他表示，「最憎人運毒」，隨後打他心口兩下。受害人在警署投訴被毆送院，留醫四日，當時的警察投訴科接手後，發現13警口供一致，陳又曾聯絡協助警方誘捕受害人的毒販，恐嚇叫他向投訴科取回證供。13警分別被落案控以毆打、傷人、非法禁錮及串謀妨礙司法公正等六項罪名。該案經過70日聆訊，至1988年1月21日，陪審團一致裁定13名被告全部罪名不成立。
有退休警務人員憶述，當年陳永良駐守九龍總區刑事調查隊，事件曝光後，「警隊內部叫佢哋做十三太保，陳永良冇份參與施以酷刑，但就被指知情不報，並想遮掩事件」。案件因技術問題，被告被判無罪釋放，「當年證人供詞不一致，加上陪審團同情被告警員，認為佢哋都係為咗做嘢，結果判佢哋無罪。」其後由當年的副警務處長下令要他們自動辭職但沒進行紀律聆訊。
本報昨向陳永良查詢，他強調是自己辭職，沒收過警隊高層要求自動辭職。「我哋個個都係被證明係清白，經過審訊之後，全部罪名不成立，全部返番工」。他不評論是否因為以往的經歷，而對有關警員特別同情。
【雨傘革命 第39天】
【本報訊】前日有份發起律師默站抗議佔中的新民黨常委陳永良律師，最近以「拯救七俠五義於水深火熱中」之名組織律師團，協助涉於「暗角」毆打示威者的七警。這名撐警律師原來曾當差，更在80年代涉與12名同袍以大鐵鎚揼背脊、灼燒下體等酷刑向疑犯逼供。案件轟動一時，警隊內部稱他們做「十三太保」。陳昨回覆本報查詢稱：「嗰件案已經係過去咗，經過審訊之後，全部罪名不成立。」
記者：張婷婷 林偉聰
陳永良昨出席香港電台節目《千禧年代》時，主持人讀出一段Twitter訊息：「各位放心，我將組成律師團，拯救七俠五義於水深火熱中，已經約好見面，為其提供法律意見。『儆惡懲奸，忠肝義膽』，這八個字從我1974年宣誓入警察學校的第一天，便牢記心中。陳永良律師上。」
陳永良在節目表示，「七俠五義」是有關警員簡稱而已，強調「法律一日未定罪，大家都唔可以話佢哋有罪」。陳永良在前日發起律師默站反佔中後，本報昨收到多個報料，指他於80年代曾與多名警務人員涉嫌向一名毒販濫用私刑，在高院接受審訊，其後獲陪審團裁定無罪，有指涉案的13名警務人員被飭令自動辭職，指陳或因自己當年的經歷，故對七警特別同情.
■七警上月在金鐘清場時涉將佔領人士曾健超帶到暗角毆打，現被停職。
時任副處長要求自動辭職
本報翻查當年的報章報道發現，有關案件發生於1986年9月初，時任高級督察陳永良擔任主管的一隊特別行動組，進行緝毒截查工作時，探員把疑人載往九龍城樂富公園。陳永良曾離開現場，受害人則被人隔着檔案夾，以大鐵鎚打背部、將打火機燒過的金屬物件，灼燒受害人肚腩和下體。兩小時後，警才載受害人返回黃大仙警署扣留。
該名有多次吸毒、行劫案底的受害人作供時曾指陳向他表示，「最憎人運毒」，隨後打他心口兩下。受害人在警署投訴被毆送院，留醫四日，當時的警察投訴科接手後，發現13警口供一致，陳又曾聯絡協助警方誘捕受害人的毒販，恐嚇叫他向投訴科取回證供。13警分別被落案控以毆打、傷人、非法禁錮及串謀妨礙司法公正等六項罪名。該案經過70日聆訊，至1988年1月21日，陪審團一致裁定13名被告全部罪名不成立。
有退休警務人員憶述，當年陳永良駐守九龍總區刑事調查隊，事件曝光後，「警隊內部叫佢哋做十三太保，陳永良冇份參與施以酷刑，但就被指知情不報，並想遮掩事件」。案件因技術問題，被告被判無罪釋放，「當年證人供詞不一致，加上陪審團同情被告警員，認為佢哋都係為咗做嘢，結果判佢哋無罪。」其後由當年的副警務處長下令要他們自動辭職但沒進行紀律聆訊。
本報昨向陳永良查詢，他強調是自己辭職，沒收過警隊高層要求自動辭職。「我哋個個都係被證明係清白，經過審訊之後，全部罪名不成立，全部返番工」。他不評論是否因為以往的經歷，而對有關警員特別同情。
2014年11月2日 星期日
Pilot Killed as Virgin Galactic Spaceship Crashes in Desert During Test Flight
http://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/1629716/pilot-killed-virgin-galactic-spaceship-crashes-desert-during-test-flight
Virgin chief Richard Branson vowed to push on towards the dream of space flight for the paying public after the fatal crash of one of his company's spacecrafts during a test flight in California.
A pilot died and another was seriously wounded when the pioneering craft for carrying tourists broke up over the Mojave desert on Friday, raising questions about the programme's future.
While Branson voiced shock at the accident involving Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo, he said he still planned to give large numbers of paying civilians a suborbital ride that would let them experience weightlessness.
"We've always known the road to space is extremely difficult - and that every new transportation system has to deal with bad days early in their history," Branson said.
"Space is hard - but worth it. We will persevere and move forward together," he added.
After travelling to the desert, Branson saluted the pilots' bravery and said he was determined to find out the cause of the crash.
He did not discuss any details of it and deferred to the investigation by experts from the US National Transportation Safety Board just getting under way.
Television images showed the wreckage of SpaceShipTwo, a test vehicle that flies to the edge of space, scattered over the desert.
The flight - the 35th by SpaceShipTwo, according to Virgin Galactic's Twitter feed - involved the same configuration as previously, although the type of fuel was new, officials said.
More than 500 people have already reserved seats - and paid a deposit on the US$250,000 ticket price - for a minutes-long suborbital flight on SpaceShipTwo, which can carry six passengers.
Two Hongkongers - a woman and a man in their late 30s - have signed up to another space tourism firm, Amsterdam-based SpaceExpedition Corp (SXC).
SpaceShipTwo's first commercial flight - in which Branson and his family have vowed to travel - has often been delayed. But it was tentatively forecast for the first half of 2015.
Virgin chief Richard Branson vowed to push on towards the dream of space flight for the paying public after the fatal crash of one of his company's spacecrafts during a test flight in California.
A pilot died and another was seriously wounded when the pioneering craft for carrying tourists broke up over the Mojave desert on Friday, raising questions about the programme's future.
While Branson voiced shock at the accident involving Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo, he said he still planned to give large numbers of paying civilians a suborbital ride that would let them experience weightlessness.
"We've always known the road to space is extremely difficult - and that every new transportation system has to deal with bad days early in their history," Branson said.
"Space is hard - but worth it. We will persevere and move forward together," he added.
After travelling to the desert, Branson saluted the pilots' bravery and said he was determined to find out the cause of the crash.
He did not discuss any details of it and deferred to the investigation by experts from the US National Transportation Safety Board just getting under way.
Television images showed the wreckage of SpaceShipTwo, a test vehicle that flies to the edge of space, scattered over the desert.
The flight - the 35th by SpaceShipTwo, according to Virgin Galactic's Twitter feed - involved the same configuration as previously, although the type of fuel was new, officials said.
More than 500 people have already reserved seats - and paid a deposit on the US$250,000 ticket price - for a minutes-long suborbital flight on SpaceShipTwo, which can carry six passengers.
Two Hongkongers - a woman and a man in their late 30s - have signed up to another space tourism firm, Amsterdam-based SpaceExpedition Corp (SXC).
SpaceShipTwo's first commercial flight - in which Branson and his family have vowed to travel - has often been delayed. But it was tentatively forecast for the first half of 2015.
29歲英國籍金融才俊 Rurik Jutting 疑淪為變態妓女殺手 - Former Bank of America Merrill Lynch Employee Rurik Jutting Suspected of Murdering Two Prostitutes At Home
http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/news/art/20141102/18920856
29歲英國籍金融才俊疑淪為變態妓女殺手，五日內先後誘騙兩名南亞裔妓女往灣仔住所，性交後用逾呎長尖刀割喉將兩人殺害，更瘋狂拍下2,000張血腥「艷屍照」，其中一名妓女頭顱幾乎被割甩、五花大綁藏屍行李篋中，萬聖節午夜狂歡，至昨凌晨疑兇第二度犯案後自行報警，並着警員「自己看」。警方先在客廳發現一具女屍，8小時後再搜獲腐爛生蟲的「篋屍」，疑兇涉嫌謀殺被捕，警方正追查是否有更多受害人。
被捕疑兇 Rurik Jutting，未婚，英國籍，持有香港身份證，在中環一間美資投資銀行任職高層約兩年，以每月近3萬元租金，租住莊士敦道60號服務式住宅嘉薈軒31樓一個500餘平方呎的一房一廳單位。
案中首先被發現的受害人30歲為菲律賓籍，她全身赤裸伏屍客廳，面部被割至血肉模糊，喉嚨遭人一刀割破放血，後頸及臀部亦被亂刀狂插；第二名被發現的受害人25歲，印尼籍，身體屈曲側放於一米長、半米闊及半米高的橙啡色軟身行李篋內，頭頸被割至幾近甩脫，僅剩皮肉相連，全身赤裸被人以露營用的尼龍繩綑綁，再被床單包裹上身，露出腳踝，屍體已發脹腐爛，出現屍蟲。
消息稱，兩名受害人均為妓女，疑兇則染有吸毒惡習，性需求甚大，交歡時亦愛玩情趣玩具。約五日前，他先在酒吧結識了25歲受害人，性交後將她殺害，把屍體藏於行李篋中置放露台，並用床褥將篋遮蓋；至前晚，疑兇又在酒吧認識了另一名30歲妓女，帶回家交易後再下毒手。據悉，兩女遇害時均全身赤裸，在睡夢中遇襲被殺，死前只能作無力掙扎，事後疑兇更為兩具女屍拍下逾2,000張照片及影片，部份更為私處及傷口大特寫，十分駭人。
昨凌晨3時許，疑兇第二次行兇後，自行致電999報案，操英語要求警方協助及聲稱有事發生，警員趕抵入屋一刻嗅到陣陣惡臭，赫見一名女子赤裸伏屍客廳，廳中一片凌亂，四周血迹斑斑，疑兇亦滿身抓痕，語無倫次，只用英語說：「你們自己看吧。」警員立即將其拘捕帶署。
大批重案組探員、鑑證科及政府化驗所人員事後作地氈式搜索，至中午時分，搜至面向皇后大道東的露台時，發現露台門被鎖，開啟入內移開床褥後發現一個行李篋，裏面竟藏着一具女屍。
警方稍後初步證實兩女子身份，行李篋內的25歲印尼籍死者，死去約四、五日，伏屍客廳的女子30歲菲律賓籍死者則約於昨凌晨遇害。
警方翻看嘉薈軒閉路電視片後，發現前晚11時許，衣着性感的菲籍死者隨疑兇回家，警員在其伏屍附近撿獲一柄逾呎長的染血尖刀，同時在梳化上撿獲震蛋等性用品，亦撿獲少量可卡因及酒精飲品，不排除案發前兩人曾吸食毒品，而於大廈頂層，前晚亦有萬聖節派對，警方會一併了解會否有關。
除了兇案單位，調查人員同時在毗鄰單位掃取指模蒐證，據悉該單位亦由英國籍人士租住，兩單位均由已故知名教育家陳樹渠的子女所持有的公司，在2008年以合共約815萬元購入。
灣仔警區助理指揮官溫兆雄稱，現正追查疑兇的犯案動機及與兩名女死者的確實關係，疑兇身上的抓痕，不排除案發前雙方曾經發生糾纏，而涉案行李篋遭人刻意用物件遮蓋，警方循程序搜查後，至昨中午才發現第二名受害人的屍體。案件列作謀殺處理，灣仔重案組接手跟進。
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-11-01/hong-kong-police-probe-suspected-murder-in-wan-chai-apartment.html
Hong Kong police arrested a 29-year-old man in connection with the deaths of two women. The man is a British national who worked for a “top-tier global bank,” the South China Morning Post reported, citing an unidentified police source.
One of the women, who was found dead inside a suitcase at an apartment in the Wan Chai district, had injuries to her neck, Hong Kong police said in a statement yesterday. The other died from cut wounds shortly after police arrived at the scene, where the foreign man was arrested and a knife found on the premises was seized, police said.
The arrested man’s name is Rurik Jutting, Apple Daily reported on its website today. Bank of America Merrill Lynch previously had an employee of that name, said Paul Scanlon, a bank spokesman. Police couldn’t immediately respond to questions about the man’s identity.
Police arriving at the scene found an unconscious foreign woman between the ages of 25 and 30 with cut wounds. Hours later they discovered the body of the second woman inside the suitcase, the South China Morning Post reported. The two women were believed to be sex workers of Southeast Asian or Asian ethnicity and were killed several days apart, the report said.
A spokesperson for the U.K. Foreign Office confirmed that a British national had been arrested in Hong Kong, but provided no other details, the British Broadcasting Corporation reported.
“We are in touch with the local police and stand ready to provide consular assistance,” the spokesperson said, according to the BBC.
https://hk.news.yahoo.com/%E5%8A%8D%E6%A9%8B%E7%A2%A9%E5%A3%AB%E8%AB%87%E5%8F%AC%E5%A6%93-%E9%8C%A2%E8%B2%B7%E5%88%B0%E5%BF%AB%E6%A8%82-215516846.html
(星島日報報道) 涉及連環兇案的疑兇，為英國頂尖大學劍橋碩士，近期將參加過的佔中活動照片，上載到「臉書」，更貼出一幀與疑似菲律賓美女的合照，似乎對南亞裔女子特別喜愛，他被捕時表現迷糊，但回復清醒則顯得冷靜，拒絕警方提問，不斷用英文重複一句話︰「你自己去查」。
涉案英漢 Rurik Jutting ，為英國劍橋大學文學碩士，之前一直在倫敦生活，兩年前來港，受聘一家國際投資銀行當高層，一年前透過地產公司，以近三萬元獨自租嘉薈軒三十一樓一個五百方呎單位，並領有本港身分證。據悉，涉案單位之業主為公司名義登記。
似鍾情南亞裔女子
疑兇於「臉書」上載疑似菲律賓美女合照，似特別鍾情南亞裔女子，又喜歡到處遊玩，包括上月一日到過金鐘佔領區，並將黃絲帶相片貼上社交網站，在萬聖節當日，即第一名女死者遇害數天後，疑兇還冷靜上網及召妓感受，認為「錢可以買到快樂。」
警方於昨日案發後抵達現場，發現疑兇精神有異，迷迷糊糊，但到了警署後回復清醒，顯得非常冷靜，拒絕回答警員所有問題，只是不斷用英文重複一句話︰「你自己去查」，故警方對案情仍掌握不多。
嘉薈軒為服務式住宅大廈，樓高四十層，於七年前入伙，二○一二年一月十二日大廈曾發生命案，醫管局明日之星、年僅三十四歲的東區醫院外科部駐院專科醫生黃浩卿，被發現在一名富貴落選港姐名下三十九樓物業墮樓分屍。醫院管理局其後證實黃帶愛滋病毒，被批評隱瞞真相。
http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1629862/foreign-national-arrested-police-investigate-double-wan-chai-murder
Hong Kong police are examining a British murder suspect’s mobile phone in a quest to indentify possible further victims after two dead women were found at his Wan Chai flat on Saturday.
Detectives are also contacting pubs and vice establishments in the area to gather evidence and learn more about the background of the two dead women found in the British banker’s flat on Saturday.
The suspect - who two sources identified as 29-year-old Rurik George Caton Jutting - was arrested early on Saturday after he called police. Officers arrived at his 31st-floor apartment at around 3.45am on Saturday to discover the body of one young woman in his living room. Her throat had been slashed.
Hours later the body of the second woman was found stuffed in a suitcase on the apartment’s balcony.
It is believed that the women were sex workers of Southeast Asian or Asian ethnicity and that they may have been killed days apart.
Jutting is a Cambridge University graduate, his online profiles suggest. He previously worked for Barclays, then joined Bank of America Merrill Lynch in London.
He moved to Hong Kong last year to continue working for the same bank in structured equity finance and trading, according to his LinkedIn profile and records from the UK Financial Servies Register.
A police source said the flat at J Residence, a high-end block at 60 Johnston Road favoured by junior expatriate bankers, was "covered in blood’’.
The first victim, aged between 25 and 30, was found naked in the living room with knife wounds to her neck and buttocks. "Two cut wounds were found in her neck and her throat was slashed," the source said.
CCTV footage showed the woman and the suspect, who has not been charged, had returned to the flat at around midnight.
About eight hours after the first body was found, the naked corpse of the second woman, thought to be Indonesian and aged 25, was discovered wrapped in a carpet inside a black suitcase on the flat’s balcony. "She was nearly decapitated and her hands and legs were bound with ropes," the source said. Her passport was found at the scene.
An initial investigation found that the body in the suitcase had been there for three to four days and had started to decompose.
"We believe the woman had been dead for quite some time," said Wan Siu-hung, Wan Chai assistant district commander for crime.
He said the time gap between the bodies’ discovery was because police had to follow strict procedures to collect the evidence in the living room before searching the balcony
A small quantity of cocaine was found in the living room. "We are investigating whether [the suspect] was under the influence of illegal drugs at the time of the incident," the source said.
A spokeswoman for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London said: "We can confirm that a British national has been arrested in Hong Kong. We are in touch with the local police and stand ready to provide consular assistance."
Security was tight at the 40-storey block in the night to Sunday.
One person who has lived at J Residence for about a year said he had noticed an odd smell recently. "There was a stink in the building like a dead animal," he said. "It was a shock because you would never expect something like this to happen in Hong Kong."
He said the building’s occupants were mainly expatriates.
The murders are the latest in a series of shocking crimes the city has seen in recent months.
A police source said the scene of the murder in Wan Chai was among the grisliest seen since the so-called "milkshake murder" in 2003, when a high-flying American banker’s wife served him a strawberry milkshake full of sedatives before bludgeoning him to death.
29歲英國籍金融才俊疑淪為變態妓女殺手，五日內先後誘騙兩名南亞裔妓女往灣仔住所，性交後用逾呎長尖刀割喉將兩人殺害，更瘋狂拍下2,000張血腥「艷屍照」，其中一名妓女頭顱幾乎被割甩、五花大綁藏屍行李篋中，萬聖節午夜狂歡，至昨凌晨疑兇第二度犯案後自行報警，並着警員「自己看」。警方先在客廳發現一具女屍，8小時後再搜獲腐爛生蟲的「篋屍」，疑兇涉嫌謀殺被捕，警方正追查是否有更多受害人。
被捕疑兇 Rurik Jutting，未婚，英國籍，持有香港身份證，在中環一間美資投資銀行任職高層約兩年，以每月近3萬元租金，租住莊士敦道60號服務式住宅嘉薈軒31樓一個500餘平方呎的一房一廳單位。
案中首先被發現的受害人30歲為菲律賓籍，她全身赤裸伏屍客廳，面部被割至血肉模糊，喉嚨遭人一刀割破放血，後頸及臀部亦被亂刀狂插；第二名被發現的受害人25歲，印尼籍，身體屈曲側放於一米長、半米闊及半米高的橙啡色軟身行李篋內，頭頸被割至幾近甩脫，僅剩皮肉相連，全身赤裸被人以露營用的尼龍繩綑綁，再被床單包裹上身，露出腳踝，屍體已發脹腐爛，出現屍蟲。
消息稱，兩名受害人均為妓女，疑兇則染有吸毒惡習，性需求甚大，交歡時亦愛玩情趣玩具。約五日前，他先在酒吧結識了25歲受害人，性交後將她殺害，把屍體藏於行李篋中置放露台，並用床褥將篋遮蓋；至前晚，疑兇又在酒吧認識了另一名30歲妓女，帶回家交易後再下毒手。據悉，兩女遇害時均全身赤裸，在睡夢中遇襲被殺，死前只能作無力掙扎，事後疑兇更為兩具女屍拍下逾2,000張照片及影片，部份更為私處及傷口大特寫，十分駭人。
昨凌晨3時許，疑兇第二次行兇後，自行致電999報案，操英語要求警方協助及聲稱有事發生，警員趕抵入屋一刻嗅到陣陣惡臭，赫見一名女子赤裸伏屍客廳，廳中一片凌亂，四周血迹斑斑，疑兇亦滿身抓痕，語無倫次，只用英語說：「你們自己看吧。」警員立即將其拘捕帶署。
大批重案組探員、鑑證科及政府化驗所人員事後作地氈式搜索，至中午時分，搜至面向皇后大道東的露台時，發現露台門被鎖，開啟入內移開床褥後發現一個行李篋，裏面竟藏着一具女屍。
警方稍後初步證實兩女子身份，行李篋內的25歲印尼籍死者，死去約四、五日，伏屍客廳的女子30歲菲律賓籍死者則約於昨凌晨遇害。
警方翻看嘉薈軒閉路電視片後，發現前晚11時許，衣着性感的菲籍死者隨疑兇回家，警員在其伏屍附近撿獲一柄逾呎長的染血尖刀，同時在梳化上撿獲震蛋等性用品，亦撿獲少量可卡因及酒精飲品，不排除案發前兩人曾吸食毒品，而於大廈頂層，前晚亦有萬聖節派對，警方會一併了解會否有關。
除了兇案單位，調查人員同時在毗鄰單位掃取指模蒐證，據悉該單位亦由英國籍人士租住，兩單位均由已故知名教育家陳樹渠的子女所持有的公司，在2008年以合共約815萬元購入。
灣仔警區助理指揮官溫兆雄稱，現正追查疑兇的犯案動機及與兩名女死者的確實關係，疑兇身上的抓痕，不排除案發前雙方曾經發生糾纏，而涉案行李篋遭人刻意用物件遮蓋，警方循程序搜查後，至昨中午才發現第二名受害人的屍體。案件列作謀殺處理，灣仔重案組接手跟進。
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-11-01/hong-kong-police-probe-suspected-murder-in-wan-chai-apartment.html
Hong Kong police arrested a 29-year-old man in connection with the deaths of two women. The man is a British national who worked for a “top-tier global bank,” the South China Morning Post reported, citing an unidentified police source.
One of the women, who was found dead inside a suitcase at an apartment in the Wan Chai district, had injuries to her neck, Hong Kong police said in a statement yesterday. The other died from cut wounds shortly after police arrived at the scene, where the foreign man was arrested and a knife found on the premises was seized, police said.
The arrested man’s name is Rurik Jutting, Apple Daily reported on its website today. Bank of America Merrill Lynch previously had an employee of that name, said Paul Scanlon, a bank spokesman. Police couldn’t immediately respond to questions about the man’s identity.
Police arriving at the scene found an unconscious foreign woman between the ages of 25 and 30 with cut wounds. Hours later they discovered the body of the second woman inside the suitcase, the South China Morning Post reported. The two women were believed to be sex workers of Southeast Asian or Asian ethnicity and were killed several days apart, the report said.
A spokesperson for the U.K. Foreign Office confirmed that a British national had been arrested in Hong Kong, but provided no other details, the British Broadcasting Corporation reported.
“We are in touch with the local police and stand ready to provide consular assistance,” the spokesperson said, according to the BBC.
https://hk.news.yahoo.com/%E5%8A%8D%E6%A9%8B%E7%A2%A9%E5%A3%AB%E8%AB%87%E5%8F%AC%E5%A6%93-%E9%8C%A2%E8%B2%B7%E5%88%B0%E5%BF%AB%E6%A8%82-215516846.html
(星島日報報道) 涉及連環兇案的疑兇，為英國頂尖大學劍橋碩士，近期將參加過的佔中活動照片，上載到「臉書」，更貼出一幀與疑似菲律賓美女的合照，似乎對南亞裔女子特別喜愛，他被捕時表現迷糊，但回復清醒則顯得冷靜，拒絕警方提問，不斷用英文重複一句話︰「你自己去查」。
涉案英漢 Rurik Jutting ，為英國劍橋大學文學碩士，之前一直在倫敦生活，兩年前來港，受聘一家國際投資銀行當高層，一年前透過地產公司，以近三萬元獨自租嘉薈軒三十一樓一個五百方呎單位，並領有本港身分證。據悉，涉案單位之業主為公司名義登記。
似鍾情南亞裔女子
疑兇於「臉書」上載疑似菲律賓美女合照，似特別鍾情南亞裔女子，又喜歡到處遊玩，包括上月一日到過金鐘佔領區，並將黃絲帶相片貼上社交網站，在萬聖節當日，即第一名女死者遇害數天後，疑兇還冷靜上網及召妓感受，認為「錢可以買到快樂。」
警方於昨日案發後抵達現場，發現疑兇精神有異，迷迷糊糊，但到了警署後回復清醒，顯得非常冷靜，拒絕回答警員所有問題，只是不斷用英文重複一句話︰「你自己去查」，故警方對案情仍掌握不多。
嘉薈軒為服務式住宅大廈，樓高四十層，於七年前入伙，二○一二年一月十二日大廈曾發生命案，醫管局明日之星、年僅三十四歲的東區醫院外科部駐院專科醫生黃浩卿，被發現在一名富貴落選港姐名下三十九樓物業墮樓分屍。醫院管理局其後證實黃帶愛滋病毒，被批評隱瞞真相。
http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1629862/foreign-national-arrested-police-investigate-double-wan-chai-murder
Hong Kong police are examining a British murder suspect’s mobile phone in a quest to indentify possible further victims after two dead women were found at his Wan Chai flat on Saturday.
Detectives are also contacting pubs and vice establishments in the area to gather evidence and learn more about the background of the two dead women found in the British banker’s flat on Saturday.
The suspect - who two sources identified as 29-year-old Rurik George Caton Jutting - was arrested early on Saturday after he called police. Officers arrived at his 31st-floor apartment at around 3.45am on Saturday to discover the body of one young woman in his living room. Her throat had been slashed.
Hours later the body of the second woman was found stuffed in a suitcase on the apartment’s balcony.
It is believed that the women were sex workers of Southeast Asian or Asian ethnicity and that they may have been killed days apart.
Jutting is a Cambridge University graduate, his online profiles suggest. He previously worked for Barclays, then joined Bank of America Merrill Lynch in London.
He moved to Hong Kong last year to continue working for the same bank in structured equity finance and trading, according to his LinkedIn profile and records from the UK Financial Servies Register.
A police source said the flat at J Residence, a high-end block at 60 Johnston Road favoured by junior expatriate bankers, was "covered in blood’’.
The first victim, aged between 25 and 30, was found naked in the living room with knife wounds to her neck and buttocks. "Two cut wounds were found in her neck and her throat was slashed," the source said.
CCTV footage showed the woman and the suspect, who has not been charged, had returned to the flat at around midnight.
About eight hours after the first body was found, the naked corpse of the second woman, thought to be Indonesian and aged 25, was discovered wrapped in a carpet inside a black suitcase on the flat’s balcony. "She was nearly decapitated and her hands and legs were bound with ropes," the source said. Her passport was found at the scene.
An initial investigation found that the body in the suitcase had been there for three to four days and had started to decompose.
"We believe the woman had been dead for quite some time," said Wan Siu-hung, Wan Chai assistant district commander for crime.
He said the time gap between the bodies’ discovery was because police had to follow strict procedures to collect the evidence in the living room before searching the balcony
A small quantity of cocaine was found in the living room. "We are investigating whether [the suspect] was under the influence of illegal drugs at the time of the incident," the source said.
A spokeswoman for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London said: "We can confirm that a British national has been arrested in Hong Kong. We are in touch with the local police and stand ready to provide consular assistance."
Security was tight at the 40-storey block in the night to Sunday.
One person who has lived at J Residence for about a year said he had noticed an odd smell recently. "There was a stink in the building like a dead animal," he said. "It was a shock because you would never expect something like this to happen in Hong Kong."
He said the building’s occupants were mainly expatriates.
The murders are the latest in a series of shocking crimes the city has seen in recent months.
A police source said the scene of the murder in Wan Chai was among the grisliest seen since the so-called "milkshake murder" in 2003, when a high-flying American banker’s wife served him a strawberry milkshake full of sedatives before bludgeoning him to death.
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)