Dr Christopher Tong Yung Man Guilty of Professional Misconduct For Improperly Touching the Breasts and Private Parts of Five Female Patients

SCMP (Monday, 5 November, 2012)

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1075109/doctor-banned-medical-council-secret-photos-women-patients

Dr Christopher Tong Yung Man was found guilty of professional misconduct and permanently deregistered after he secretly took pictures of six women patients and improperly touched the breasts and private parts of five of them.

Dr Christopher Tong Yung Man, 33, was convicted on 11 counts of failing to meet the professional standard for medical practitioners.  The council described Dr Christopher Tong Yung Man, as "scandalous and unethical" after he was found to have several cameras in his Tai Wai clinic.

A total of 34 photos and seven videos of six patients taken in 2007 and 2008 were found.

Dr Allan So Cheuk Wai Found Guilty of Molesting Three Nurses at a Public Hospital.

SCMP (Saturday, 24 November, 2012)

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1089415/doctor-jailed-16-weeks-molesting-three-nurses

Dr Allan So Cheuk Wai was yesterday sentenced to 16 weeks in jail after he was found guilty of molesting three nurses at a public hospital.

Magistrate Ko Wai-hung sentenced neurosurgeon Dr Allan So Cheuk Wai, 36, in Kowloon City Court, for his conviction on three counts of indecent assault and two counts of committing an act outraging public decency.

The court previously heard that Dr Allan So Cheuk Wai molested three nurses, aged between 27 and 41, and exposed himself on various occasions between January 2010 and June last year. One victim said Dr Allan So Cheuk Wai approached her from behind at a nursing station and pressed his genitals against her hand. He was fully dressed at the time. Another victim said Dr Allan So Cheuk Wai, who is married, exposed his pubic hair and penis to her while she was showing him how to use a safety pin to secure his loose trousers.

The judge said an immediate custodial sentence was "the only option" because the offences were serious and Dr Allan So Cheuk Wai showed "no remorse" - insisting on his innocence throughout the trial.

Dr Tsoi Wing Sang Guilty of Professional Misconduct

SCMP (Monday 3 June, 2013)

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1252227/doctor-guilty-over-sexual-remarks

Asking a female patient to pose like a dog that's urinating, and telling her to find herself a man: those were requests made by a doctor that have now landed him in hot water.

Dr Tsoi Wing-sang was found guilty by the Medical Council yesterday of professional misconduct after a 41-year-old former school teacher, known as Ms A, accused him of sexually harassing her.

He was found guilty on two charges - one of making statements of a sexual nature, and another of asking a patient to perform unnecessary postures under the pretext of treatment.

Tsoi was removed from the council's registry for 12 months, but the penalty was suspended for three years. It means he will be able to continue practising unless convicted again within the next three years.

"I was in a short skirt and he asked me to put my left hand up and bend my left leg back, like a dog peeing," said the teacher, imitating the pose at the disciplinary hearing.

The incident took place on May 8 last year, when Ms A was seeking treatment for the flu, rhinitis and insomnia.

"Oh, Ms A, you're so hot, you should get married and go hook up with a man as soon as possible," he reportedly suggested as a way to relieve the insomnia.

Tsoi repeatedly told the council that the insomnia had been caused by Ms A's negative thoughts and depression, but did not present any evidence supporting such a diagnosis when pressed during the hearing.

This is the third time Tsoi has been disciplined by the council in his 20-year career. In 2004 he was found guilty of presenting false credentials, and in 2006 he was handed a warning after failing to disclose a criminal conviction. He had failed to keep a proper register of dangerous drugs.

Tsoi's practice is currently based in To Kwa Wan, eastern kowloon.

Joseph Lau Wan-yee, chairman of the council, said this was the first conviction for verbal abuse. "We have to send a clear message to the public that we will not tolerate this kind of obscene remark," he said.

When asked whether the sentencing was too lenient, Lau said the council had taken into account past sentencing for sexual misconduct by the Medical Council in making their decision. Tsoi denied making any comments of a sexual nature, but admitted he had jokingly told Ms A to get married to a rich man and move to the Mid-Levels to cure her insomnia and rhinitis.

Tsoi had filed a writ with the High Court against Ms A in March, saying she had defamed him with malicious intent by accusing him of sexual harassment, but he later told the council it had been a misunderstanding. A legal officer accused Tsoi of making "contradictory" statements and being inconsistent with his facts.

Dr Barry Tsang Ka Hung Guilty of Professional Misconduct for Having Sex With a Woman Patient

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1194137/doctor-guilty-sex-patient

(SCMP, Tuesday, 19 March, 2013)

Dr Barry Tsang Ka Hung has been found guilty of three charges of professional misconduct for selling insurance to and having sex with a woman patient, the Medical Council announced last night.

The professional ruling body has yet to decide the penalty for Dr Barry Tsang Ka Hung, 42, who could be permanently deregistered as a doctor.

Dr Barry Tsang Ka Hung was seen shaking his head and sighing when the ruling was announced.

Dr Barry Tsang Ka Hung, who has practised privately since graduating from Chinese University medical school in 1994, had sold the woman insurance after saying that he had money problems, the disciplinary inquiry was earlier told.

He denied the allegations.

In the initial hearing in January, the patient claimed she and Tsang had sex twice in his clinic and three times in guest houses in 2009.

The patient said earlier she and Tsang were lovers from February to October 2009, during which time she was also seeing him as a doctor.

They split after Tsang told her he was getting back with his wife. She said Tsang had told her he was divorced and had shown her what he claimed was a copy of his divorce papers.

In October 2009, she tested positive for human papillomavirus, or HPV, which causes genital warts. She later said she was not accusing the doctor of giving her HPV, only that there was a possibility he had done so.

The woman also said she had bought insurance to help Tsang after he said he was in financial difficulties in 2008 and 2009.

In February 2011 Tsang was found guilty in Kwun Tong Court of cheating the Department of Health out of HK$960 with false claims that he had given influenza vaccinations to four elderly people in 2009. He was sentenced to 120 hours of community service.

前聯合醫院精神科醫生羅文友與女病人性交永久釘牌 - Former United Hospital Psychiatrist Dr Law Man Yau Banned for Life for Having Sex with a Female Patient

http://orientaldaily.on.cc/cnt/news/20090502/00176_033.html

前聯合醫院醫生羅文友涉嫌不正當親近五名女病人的案件，醫務委員會昨日達成裁決，涉及羅的十五項指控中，共有十項指控裁定成立，包括羅被指與精神科女病人A發展不恰當關係，他也因此而被重判極刑即無限期停牌。醫委會主席麥列菲菲狠斥羅濫用精神科病人對醫生的依賴，在病者身上「攞便宜」，更與有關病人發生性關係，是難以接受，故委員一致認為必須處以極刑。今次亦是首次有醫生因與病人發生性關係而遭無限期停牌。

這宗審訊期長達五個多月的案件，終以羅文友被判無限期「釘牌」終結。現年近六十歲的羅文友，原任職聯合醫院精神科醫生，被控以十五項專業失德，醫委會昨裁定其中十項指控成立（見表），包括與女精神病人A發生不恰當個人關係，亦因此被判處無限期停牌，醫委會同時建議被告十年內不得申請復牌；至於向病人處方危險藥物但未有妥善記錄及私下保存病人退回藥物等三項控罪，則分別被判處停牌一個月及三個月，而擅取病人病歷及與女精神病人A有不適當接觸的指控則被予以譴責。

灣仔告士打道解款車跌錢事件中負責押運鈔票的解款公司G4S今日再致歉

http://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20141225/bkn-20141225184154856-1225_00822_001.html?eventsection=hk_news&eventid=4028828d4a52711d014a7b04c4d16b6f

灣仔告士打道解款車跌錢事件中，負責押運鈔票的解款公司G4S今日再發表聲明，對中銀香港造成的影響及對廣大市民帶來不便致歉，又指公司會按合約內容，處理日後與中銀香港相關的索償事宜。 G4S表示，事發時負責押運款項的3名解款員已被停職；解款車現正被扣留，公司會全力配合警方調查，並承諾會即時作出調整措施，避免類似事件再次發生。

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/news/art/20141225/18981018

香港安全押運服務有限公司G4S一輛押款車，在灣仔告士打道時「離奇」跌錢，導致眾人撲出馬路搶走1,523萬元現金事件。警方認為事件實屬罕見兼且充滿疑點，當中包括解款員在車上的位置，以及錢箱為何會從車身側門跌出？灣仔警區重案組探員接手調查案件，案發後前往G4S位於長沙灣總部調查，了解該公司的押款程序。

解款員坐車位置有異

昨天下午，重案組探員前往G4S位於青山道481號總部，向肇事解款車車長及三名解款員錄取口供。消息透露，探員初步質疑為何部份以保險紙條帶緊纏的全新500元現鈔，由解款車跌出路面後，竟然「一跌即散」，復隨風飄散至馬路，鈔票的包裝是否出現問題？押送過程中有無被移動過。

警方調查的另一重點是，根據一般情況，解款車上包括司機在內的四名解款員，其中一至兩位持槍解款員需乘坐車廂側門位置，並在側門上落，但今次事件中，四名解款員全部坐在車頭，而錢箱則從側門跌出馬路。警方會了解押送程序及保安措施是否出現問題，過程中是否有其他人參與。

灣仔警區助理指揮官（刑事）溫兆雄警司表示，肇事解款車當時押運30箱，全是500元面額鈔票的塑膠錢箱，部份錢箱的現金總值1,500萬至1,700萬元。

警方除呼籲取走鈔票人士盡快將現金交還外，並會調查是否牽涉人為疏忽或刑事成份，溫表示，由於大部份失去的現金為簇新鈔票，警方會根據鈔票的編號追查失款下落。另一方面，警方亦會根據現場一帶閉路電視畫面紀錄，追查牽涉今次「搶錢」事件的人士及車輛。

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/news/art/20141225/18980859

路有財物，你會否俯身執拾？有律師提醒市民，在街上執到財物並且據為己有，可能會觸犯盜竊罪，即使犯案人士事後離開香港，本港警方仍可以向其他國家或地區提供涉案人資料，要求當地執法部門協助追查。

事後離港仍犯法

律師接受訪問時表示，市民在街上執到屬於他人擁有及具有價值的財物，例如現金等，沒有將財物交予警方反而擅自據為己有，其行為等同拾遺不報，有可能已觸犯盜竊罪，一旦罪名成立，最高刑期是判監10年。「因為呢啲財物根本就唔係屬於佢哋（執拾者）。財物擁有人如果表明唔要或者將財物丟去垃圾站，咁嘅情況去執就唔算有罪，未必觸犯到法律」。

對於有網民拍到有疑似內地旅行團，昨日在灣仔告士打道執拾解款車跌下的現金並迅速離開現場，律師稱，如果執到財物及據為己有的並非香港居民，事後並且帶同財物離開本港，本港警方無法跨境執法，在此情況下只能透過涉案人士所在國家或地區的執法部門協助追查，角色被動。

律師補充，能否追討相關財物，還須視乎相關國家或地區是否有防止洗黑錢的法例，如果當地有相關法例，本港警方可以將涉案人及被盜現鈔的資料傳送當地執法部門調查跟進，一旦查到涉案人曾將盜取而來的現鈔兌現並存入戶口，執法部門可凍結該戶口。

上訴庭：不應引導陪審「警較可信」

http://news.mingpao.com/pns/%E4%B8%8A%E8%A8%B4%E5%BA%AD%EF%BC%9A%E4%B8%8D%E6%87%89%E5%BC%95%E5%B0%8E%E9%99%AA%E5%AF%A9%E3%80%8C%E8%AD%A6%E8%BC%83%E5%8F%AF%E4%BF%A1%E3%80%8D/web_tc/article/20141224/s00002/1419356966752


【明報專訊】育有兩子的27歲母親，經審訊後原被裁定販毒及藏毒罪成，判囚7年，惟她不服上訴，上訴庭認為案中兩名警員證供不可信，更有杜撰之嫌，裁定上訴得直，撤銷控罪及判刑。上訴庭昨在判辭指出，根據法律原則，法官引導陪審團時不應說因證人是警員，其經驗和訓練會令其證供較可信，認為這只會「引起不必要的爭議」。

警疑涉造假 婦脫販毒

法官潘兆初在判辭指出，控方主要依賴上訴人老嘉盈向警員作出的兩次口頭招認，以及相關紀錄作為證據，法官考慮證供後，認為兩名警員並非可信或可靠的證人。法官稱，當日負責拘捕的警員原在其警員記事冊上將上訴人的住處記錄為「青山道」某單位，後來將其刪改為「福華道621號」、即案發單位。法官指案發時上訴人確住在青山道單位，上訴人稱她曾告訴警員，但警員否認，更解釋因他經常巡邏青山道一帶，才因手民之誤將上訴人的住址寫成青山道，法官認為這樣的解釋是「荒謬之至」，警員能夠寫下青山道地址，必然是因為上訴人曾告訴他。

警辯寫錯 官：荒謬之至

法官認為，警員的意圖明顯不過，是想令人相信上訴人住在案發單位，將她陷入不利處境；法官指這難免令人懷疑有關上訴人作出口頭招認等的紀錄，亦是該警員杜撰。至於另一名警員在記錄有關上訴人的詳細招認時，亦沒記錄自己的提問，同樣有杜撰之嫌。

法官又指出，原審高院暫委法官黃崇厚引導陪審團時曾說，警員「曾經受訓，有職責在身，因此（可能）係較好或者較誠實嘅證人」，但這樣的指引並無需要。案發於前年7月10日，上訴人原被控非法販運14.31克冰毒及藏有0.64克冰毒。

【案件編號：CACC45/14】

50歲游泳教練林德明涉藉按摩療傷揸學生胸

http://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20141224/bkn-20141224132657792-1224_00822_001.html

報稱游泳教練的50歲男子林德明，涉去年8月在北角歌頓道明興大廈歌頓維多利亞酒店，非禮其20歲女學生。被告今日在東區法院否認非禮罪，案件將在明年2月6日開審，期間被告獲准以一千元保釋。控方透露，會傳召兩名證人；被告就表明會聘請私人律師。

據悉，被告與事主為師生關係，案發當日被告以短訊聯絡事主，指可為其傷勢按摩。當事主上課完畢後，被告就帶她到案發地點，事主脫去上衣，只剩下一件頭泳衣，被告就涉伸手入事主泳衣內並揸胸。事主之後一年繼續跟隨被告學習游泳，直至其母親埋怨事主的游泳技術退步，事主向親友反映事件，親友再告知事主母親才揭發案件。

Blinded by Desire for High Life, Rafael Hui Jailed for 7½ years; Thomas Kwok Imprisoned for Five Years

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1668566/blinded-desire-high-life-hui-jailed-712-years-kwok-sentenced-five

Disgraced Rafael Hui Si-yan, who was "blinded by the desire to sustain the high life", was yesterday jailed for 7½ years, becoming the highest-ranking former Hong Kong official ever to be locked up.

Property billionaire Thomas Kwok Ping-kwong was sentenced to spend the next five years in a cell, as a key chapter closed in the biggest graft trial in the city's history.

The High Court's landmark ruling sends a clear warning against business-government corruption in today's Hong Kong.

"Like all tragic characters, you had a flaw," Mr Justice Andrew Macrae said as he sentenced the stony-faced Hui, 66. "Whether one uses the pejorative word 'greed' or puts it more kindly that you were blinded by the desire to sustain the high life to which you had been accustomed."

He added: "Had it not been for this case, you [Hui] would probably have gone down in history as one of Hong Kong's finest chief secretaries in recent years.

"It is quite clear to me that you were very adept at using your anticipated position to gain as much advantage for yourself," Macrae told the former government No 2, who pocketed HK$8.5 million from Kwok up to a few hours before he was sworn in as chief secretary in 2005. "High-ranking officials in particular owe a duty ... to the people of Hong Kong," Macrae said. "The breach of that duty and trust is a significant aspect of your culpability."

Hui took a total of almost HK$20 million in bribes to be favourably disposed to Sun Hung Kai Properties. He was found guilty of five out of eight counts, including misconduct in public office and bribery.

"It would have been very easy for useful information [such as] government thinking or policy to be communicated to someone outside the government," the judge said. "I am not so naive as to suppose that just because no specific quid pro quo can be identified, there was not."

Hong Kong had for years lived with a perception of government and business cosying up to each other, Macrae said. "Regrettably this case will have done nothing to dispel that perception." It was vital for the two sides to remain corruption-free - "particularly when the mainland is taking obvious and positive steps to eradicate the cancer of corruption".

The judge also imposed a HK$500,000 fine on Kwok, who was SHKP co-chairman until last week, a punishment he said was "necessary to deter others tempted" to bribe public officials.

Kwok's former subordinate Thomas Chan Kui-yuen - an SHKP executive director until his conviction - was jailed for six years and fined the same amount. Francis Kwan Hung-sang, a former stock exchange official, wept when he was sentenced to five years in jail.

Chan and Kwan were involved in all the payments, including an HK$11.182 million bribe in 2007. Hui was ordered to pay that sum to the government under bribery laws - although this will have little meaning as he has already declared bankruptcy.

The case came to light in 2008 when the graft-buster received an anonymous report, and arrests were made in 2012.

_________________________________

Full Text of the Reasons for Sentence: -

I will begin if I may by making some observations about this particular case which I have now lived with as judge since the first application connected with these proceedings was made on 15 July last year. Although preceded by several pre-trial applications, the trial proper started on 8 May 2014, more than 7 months ago. The jury of nine heard evidence from more than 80 witnesses. My summing-up alone took 5 days to complete. 

At one stage,  there were listed in front of me 21 counsel, 5 of them from the English Bar, and amongst the 21, no less than 8 leading counsel. As one might expect in such circumstances, the proceedings have been difficult not only in terms of the evidence and the time it has taken, but in the multiplicity of issues which have been engaged and which I have been required to deal with during the trial process. However, in all of that process, nothing has been more difficult than the sentencing of the defendants in front of me today.

It is often said that sentencing is an art and not a science. If it were a science, it would no doubt be an easier exercise to conduct. In truth, sentencing is one of the most difficult functions a judge can perform, particularly when dealing with offences where there are no guidelines beyond various expressions of judicial opinion in other cases dealing with the same offence but with very different facts.  And it is particularly difficult when one is dealing with otherwise decent men, who are not young but who have committed serious offences. 

For the two facets of sentencing, the first which requires a judge to exercise a public duty in dealing effectively and consistently with serious crimes, and the second which requires him to mitigate the harsh effects of that sentence by acknowledging in an appropriate way the personal circumstances of the individual, are not always an easy balance to achieve. However, our system gives to the judge who has heard the evidence the unique discretion to act in a principled way to effect that balance, even though the way he exercises that discretion will always provoke those who have not had the advantage of hearing the evidence to  say that he has leant too far one way or too far the other.

I have been taken to guidelines in the United Kingdom issued by the Sentencing Council in relation to Fraud, Bribery and Money Laundering. They are helpful to some extent in identifying the various factors of culpability and harm, which may be engaged in corruption offences but the law of England is different, their maximum sentences for such offences are different, their experience of these offences is different and Hong Kong has long developed its own approach and sentencing jurisprudence  to this area of sentencing law.

The first defendant, Mr Rafael Hui, falls to be dealt with for 5 offences: Count 5 of Conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office, contrary to common law; Count 7, Conspiracy to offer an advantage to a public servant, contrary to sections 4(1)(a) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance, Cap 201; and three counts of misconduct in public office, contrary to common law, namely Counts 1, 6 and 8.

The second defendant, Mr Thomas Kwok Ping­ kwong, has been found guilty of Count 5 alone.

The fourth defendant, Mr Thomas Chan Kui-yuen and the fifth defendant, Mr Francis Kwan Hung  Sang, fall to be dealt with for the two conspiracies of which they were found guilty, namely Counts 5 and 7.

All of the defendants are currently in their sixties, Mr Hui 66, Mr Kwok 63, Mr Chan 68 and Mr Kwan 64. All are of unblemished character and I accept that going to prison for the first time at this stage of their lives will be a particular hardship for all of them, no doubt exacerbated by the health issues, which each of them has. I wish to make clear that I have borne in mind their ages when considering the appropriate sentences they must serve; in particular, in the significance to be attached to their good characters.

I propose to deal with the second defendant first, because in a sense his case is the most straight-forward, given that he must be sentenced for one offence only, the maximum sentence prescribed by law being 7 years' imprisonment.

The first question, which I must address, is what the starting point should be for a single offence of conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office committed in the circumstances of this case. There is a compelling argument that the payment of HK$18.5 million bribe by the instigator of the offence to the No 2 in Government, made in a deliberately complex and intricate way through various co-conspirators, which then took months if not years to uncover, is an extremely serious example of the offence. It should also be recognized that it is not the function of judges to use their imaginations to conjure up even worse examples of the offence with which they are dealing, but to consider the worst type of offence which comes before the court and ask themselves whether the particular case they are dealing with it comes within the broad band of that type. Accordingly, there is a compelling argument that this offence merits a starting point at the maximum of 7 years imprisonment.

I have considered this argument, but I am minded to agree with Ms Montgomery (and with Mr Choy and Mr Winter) that this is not a case for the adoption of the maximum sentence as a starting point. Serious though it is (given the high degree of trust placed in D1 by the government and the people of Hong Kong when he was sworn in as Chief Secretary to the HKSAR Government), the case against the second defendant has never been that D1, as Chief Secretary, in fact did anything specific, or in fact did anything which he would not otherwise have done, for the money which he received. The allegation has always been that the defendants conspired together for Dl to misconduct himself by being or remaining favourably disposed to Sun Hung Kai Properties or the other entities set out in the count. I am not so naive as to suppose that just because no specific quid pro quo can be identified, there was not, in view of the sheer size of the payment, thereby created a relationship in which it would have been very easy for useful information on about government thinking or policy to be communicated to someone outside the government. Nevertheless, I am prepared to proceed on the basis that the notion of a public official doing something favourable in return for a payment is at its most attenuated, to paraphrase McMullin J (as he then was) in Attorney-General  v Chung Fat-Nfing [1978] HKLR 480 at 488, in the context of the allegation of favourable disposition by being kept sweet.

In my view, the appropriate starting point in this case for the instigator of fill offence such as Count 5, as averred by the prosecution, is one of 6 years' imprisonment. I am satisfied in adopting that lower starting point by the fact that I also intend to pass upon the second defendant a substantial fine, which I deem necessary to deter others tempted to embark on a course of conduct which subverts the conduct of public officials.

The next question is to what extent that starting point is mitigated by the personal  circumstances of the defendant. Anyone reading the bundle of testamentary documents produced by Ms Montgomery  on behalf of Mr Thomas Kwok, or listening to Dr Choi or Ms Pullinger, could not fail to be moved by the genuineness of Mr Kwok's Christian faith and his compassion for those less fortunate tham himself. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that you, Mr Kwok, are at heart a good man and a sincere one, whose work and altruism have touched the lives of a great many people. Your good

works over very many years have earned you a well-deserved reputation as a genuinely motivated philanthropist and not just someone who can afford to be generous. But what may not have been appreciated by the general public is the full extent of your altruism which has extended, as some of the letters, for example that of Mr Lau Yuan Chum, reveal, beyond the churches and the charities you support, beyond the staff of Sun Hung Kai whom you might be expected to exhibit a special concern for when they are confronted by personal difficulties, to ordinary people caught up in personal tragedies with which they cannot cope. And all of these people say the same thing, that at no time have you looked for any recognition for the good you have and and that you are at all times genuinely motivated by your faith.

In my judgment, if the mitigation of positive good character means anything, I must place these matters fully in the sentencing balance and give effect to them in a real way. I propose, therefore, to give you a one year reduction for mitigation from the starting point of 6 years. Were I to give you more than a one year reduction, I would be giving undue regard to your personal mitigation and run the risk of approaching your sentence as though you had pleaded guilty, which would not be a principled exercise of my sentencing discretion.

The sentence that I must pass on you is, therefore, one of 5 years' imprisonment.   I will also order that you pay a fine of $500,000, in default of which you will serve a further one year of imprisonment.

I have no doubt you will have learned from this experience and you, above all people, will know that while there may be pain in the night, joy comes in the morning.  I accept Ms Montgomery' s submissions in relation to disqualification. I shall order that you be disqualified under section 168D of the Companies Ordinance, Cap 32 from being a director of any company for a period of 5 years from today...

法官關注麥高義資深大律師處理案件手法 - Judge Expressed Concerns About the Way Gerald McCoy SC Dealt With the Case

http://news.tvb.com/local/54994e166db28c3864000003/

在案中被裁定罪名不成立的郭炳聯，法官關注代表他的大律師處理案件的手法，希望大律師公會跟進。  郭炳聯前年三月被廉署拘捕後，透過資深大律師麥高義向律政司呈交一份陳述書，回應廉署的指控，控方後來用陳述書來指控郭炳聯。  法官麥機智對大律師的做法表示關注，更指有其他法官都對這做法感驚訝。若郭炳聯有出庭作供，不認同陳述書的內容，情況會很棘手。特別是麥高義，在本案一度代表郭炳聯出庭，希望大律師公會能在這方面發出指引。

法官下令郭炳灴及陳鉅源各支付訟費1250萬 - Justice Andrew Macrae Ordered Thomas Kwok and Thomas Chan To Pay Costs to the Prosecution

http://www.thestandard.com.hk/breaking_news_detail.asp?id=55569&icid=a&d_str=20141223

Justice Andrew Macrae has ordered former Sun Hung Kai Properties co-chairman Thomas Kwok Ping-kwong and executive director Thomas Chan Kui-yuen to pay the legal fees -- HK$12.5 million each -- of the case.

http://news.sina.com.hk/news/20141223/-1967-3533198/1.html

法官下令郭炳灴及陳鉅源各支付訟費1250萬。

許仕仁案：四人判囚5至7年半 - Rafael Hui's Case - 4 Defendants Imprisoned for 5 to 7 and a Half Years -

http://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20141223/bkn-20141223115449925-1223_00822_001.html

前政務司司長許仕仁貪污案，法官今早宣布4名被告分別判刑5至7年半，「主角」許仕仁最終判監禁7年半，並需交還逾1118萬元賄款；另外郭炳江被判囚5年，取消董事資格5年，陳鉅源被判囚6年，取消董事資格6年，兩人同時各被罰款50萬元，並各自支付1250萬元訟費；至於關雄生則被判囚5年。

法官判刑時指，考慮許仕仁曾在政府出任30年公職，期間曾做過多個政府職位，備受尊重，且口才了得，直言如非本案，許應是「最好的政務司司長」，但他為維持奢華生活，而變得貪心，利用職權謀利，破壞委任者的信任，行為亦令人聯想到「官商勾結」，亦令致力打擊貪污的港人大受打擊，但判刑不會不考慮許在1998年擊退「金融大鱷」的貢獻，又謂由前特首曾蔭權爵士的求情信，便可知道其功業。

法官亦指，相信郭炳江是個善心及誠懇的人，惟他向許仕仁提供利益的行為或令新鴻基一方知道政府政策，但考慮其宗教信仰及善心，給予他1年減刑。至於陳鉅源雖然非案件主腦，且是新鴻基忠心員工，但在事件中扮演中心角色，故判刑較重。

法官又謂，關雄生並非與新鴻基有關，或是新鴻基職員，但新鴻基卻經關向許仕仁付款，關亦有收取報酬，顯示有重要角色，但根據關的個人背景，顯示他素來慷慨助人，有良好個品格，認為關為人真誠且樂於助人，在金融界有「好好聲譽」，故信立他是因對朋友的忠誠而涉及案件，犯案與其性格不同。

此案經過逾7個月審訊、陪審團退庭商議5日4夜後，最終裁定許仕仁8罪中有5罪成立，被控3罪的郭炳江則1罪成立，被指協助錢銀交收的陳鉅源和關雄生，則各被裁定2罪罪成。
____________

http://www.thestandard.com.hk/breaking_news_detail.asp?id=55568

Former Chief Secretary Rafael Hui Si-yan has been sentenced to 7.5 years in prison.

On Friday, he was found guilty by a High Court jury of accepting HK$8.5 million in bribes from former Sun Hung Kai Properties co-chairman, Thomas Kwok Ping-kwong, in return for the former official to be "favorably disposed" to the developer.

Kwok, who was found guilty of conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office, was sentenced to five years in prison and fined HK$500,000.

許仕仁情婦曝光 - Identity of Rafael Hui's Mistress Revealed

http://news.sina.com.hk/news/20141220/-2-3528820/1.html

前政務司司長許仕仁昨日被法庭判公職人員行為失當及受賄近二千萬元等五項罪名成立。原來許落得鋃鐺入獄下場的背後主因之一，是曾大花金錢博取年齡相差三十三年的「小三」歡心所累。許仕仁曾在庭上自辯時自爆○八年起「包養上海小三」， 本報查悉， 許仕仁口中的「小三」，原來是港龍航空的前空姐Eline，她樣貌甜美，在○五年一次飯局中透過朋友介紹而認識許仕仁，當年她年僅二十四歲，許仕仁見她年輕貌美，即將個人的手機號碼告知對方，三年後空姐結過婚又離過婚，為了「想找人依靠」，決定於○八年藉旅遊來港找許仕仁，許即時答應會照顧她。自此她每次來港均由許安排入住金鐘六星級港麗酒店，兩人每次見面都會發生性行為。

詳情請閱十二月二十日《星島日報》。

http://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20141220/bkn-20141220184828598-1220_00822_001.html

貪污罪成的前政務司司長許仕仁作供時自爆曾包養一名上海姑娘，給予對方金額800萬元以上。該名女子身份曝光，兩人邂逅時為05年，女方年僅24歲，當時任職空姐，三年後，女方匆匆結婚又離婚，來港投靠許仕仁，獲許仕仁照顧，入住港麗酒店密會，又送她上海物業和汽車。直到2011年，許仕仁受查，雙方關係無疾而終。

獲許仕仁照顧的上海姑娘沈莉娜，洋名Eline，05年在一個飯局認識許仕仁，但不知道許仕仁是高官，只知他有錢和己婚。據悉，許仕仁見她年輕貌美，立即傾心，主動留下手提電話給她。事隔多年，沈莉娜經歷婚變，於是來港投靠許仕仁，雙方發展親密關係。

許仕仁在庭上供稱，在08年和之後的一、兩年，有把錢給上海一個「女性朋友」；許形容這名朋友「應該算係後生」，他與對方「起碼在某些時段關係親密」。至於給對方的金額，「應該有成好幾百萬，唔係好記得實數，應該有700至800萬以上」。

許仕仁庭上續稱，首次與女方見面是在本港一個社交場合，但兩人見面次數不算頻密，雙方會在香港、上海和北京見面。他送贈現金供對方置業和投資，也有送手袋、手錶等禮品，他指這些禮物「價值當然唔平，但唔係好豪華」。

許仕仁5罪成 - Rafael Hui Convicted of 5 Charges

http://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20141219/bkn-20141219144745966-1219_00822_001.html

Rafael Hui Convicted of 5 Charges - 許仕仁5罪成

前政務司司長許仕仁在任前後收受新鴻基地產集團利益案，9名陪審員經過5日的退庭商議後，下午作出裁決。許仕仁8項控罪中5項成立，郭炳江1罪成，郭炳聯則全部控罪不成立，陳鉅源和關雄生2項控罪全部成立。

許仕仁首項控罪藉公職作出不當行為罪成，陪審團以8比1，大比數裁定許仕仁罪成。第二項控罪許與郭炳江均以9比0裁定罪名不成立。第三項及第四項控罪許及郭炳聯均以7比2裁定罪名不成立。第五項控罪許以7比2裁定罪名成立，此控罪涉及本案5名被告，只有郭炳聯脫罪，其餘4人皆罪成。第六項控罪許亦以7比2裁定罪名成立。第七項控罪涉及5名被告，其中許仕仁、陳鉅源及關雄生罪名成立，郭氏兄弟則不成立。第八項控罪許仕仁就以7比2裁定罪名成立。

本案5名被告包括前政務司司長許仕仁、新地董事局聯席主席兼董事總經理郭炳江及郭炳聯兄弟、新地執行董事陳鉅源及港交所前高級副總裁關雄生。他們被控串謀藉公職作出不當行為、串謀向公職人員提供利益等共8罪。控罪指他們在2000至2007年，即許先後擔任積金局行政總監、政務司司長及行會非官守議員等公職期間，串謀讓許收受現金饋贈、貸款及免租入住豪宅等利益，以換取許在公職上優待新地。

________________________________________

http://www.thestandard.com.hk/breaking_news_detail.asp?id=55529

Former Chief Secretary Rafael Hui Si-yan has been found guilty by a High Court jury of accepting HK$8.5 million in bribes from Sun Hung Kai Properties co-chairman, Thomas Kwok Ping-kwong, in return for the former official to be "favorably disposed" to the developer.

Hui was found guilty of three counts of misconduct in public office, one count of conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office and one count of conspiracy to offer an advantage to public servant.

Thomas Kwok was found guilty of one count of conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office.
His brother Raymond Kwok Ping-luen was clear of all charges.

Former Hong Kong stock exchange official Francis Kwan Hung-sang and Sun Hung Kai Properties executive director Thomas Chan Kui-yuen were each found guilty to two counts of charges.

The jurors spent the last five day before coming up with the verdicts. They found nothing wrong with other multi-million dollar payments Hui received from the Kwok's brothers.

破產許仕仁拍賣鹹碟 - Bankrupt Raphael Hui's Collection of Pornographic Materials Auctioned

http://news.sina.com.hk/news/20141218/-2-3525519/1.html

 Bankrupt Raphael Hui's Collection of Pornographic Materials Auctioned - 破產許仕仁拍賣鹹碟

前政務司司長許仕仁去年被頒布破產，前日約一萬一千張珍藏黑膠唱片及雷射影碟（LD）被公開拍賣，當中包括五隻「鹹碟」，其中兩隻碟名為「二○八招」及「野浪花」。許仕仁的破產受託人在報章刊登廣告指明，任何有興趣人士可在網上資料庫中出價，並歡迎大量或全部購買有關珍藏，但須提供聯絡資料。

另外，據許仕仁的破產受託人在報章刊登廣告所示，被拍賣的許仕仁珍藏中以音樂黑膠碟及雷射影碟為主，分別有古典音樂、爵士、流行搖滾及電子樂。許收藏不同年代各國著名歌手和樂隊的唱片，如The Beatles、BEEGEES、日本女歌手五輪真弓等，當中一套內有十六張日本一九八七年《頭版》The Beatles絕版雷射唱片，價值逾十萬元。許仕仁的古典音樂唱片份量亦不輕，當中大部分為日版珍藏，亦不乏卡拉揚、蘇提等殿堂級指揮家的名盤。許亦鍾情張國榮和梅艷芳，有多張二人絕版唱片出售。

據悉，許仕仁曾在一個月內光顧「香港唱片」九次，○五至一○年間，他在「香港唱片」的以信用卡消費二百萬元。許又曾在○七年十一月，一日內兩次光顧唱片店「Sam the Record Man」，合共碌卡達十九萬五千元掃碟。

令人厭惡的警長朱仲明醉酒亂舞槍罪成 - Disgusting Police Sergeant Chu Chung Ming Guilty of Holding Gun While Drunk

http://news.sina.com.hk/news/20141211/-2-3513308/1.html

休班警長朱仲明去年11月與同袍到酒吧飲醉酒，乘的士返回紀律部隊宿舍後，於電梯大堂持搶亂舞，更睡於花槽旁，而警槍則插在褲頭。43歲被告昨日於觀塘法院被裁定醉酒時管有實彈火器及彈藥罪罪成，還押至12月24日判刑。

案情指，被告朱仲明乃已婚警長，於去年度11月29日休班時先後與同袍到兩間酒吧飲酒，飲醉後被告乘的士返點秀茂坪紀律部隊宿舍後，在電梯大堂內舞弄佩槍，最後更醉倒花槽，腰間仍插有佩槍。保安員見狀報警求助，警方其後更於的士內尋回一粒遺失的佩槍子彈。

裁判官在裁決時指，據閉路電視片段及證人的作供，朱仲明應該是因酒精影響，在失去判斷及思考能力的情況下而犯案。裁判官強調手槍是力量的象徵，被告應好好控制；但被告卻妄顧他人的安全，持佩槍在不同地方飲酒，更舞弄佩槍並失去子彈，予以譴責。雖然同意被告有家庭工作及壓力，但社會絕不不容許他作出此等行為，而法庭亦需建立社會對警隊的信心。

被告現時正被停職，裁判官將案押至12月24日判刑，期間等待其社會服務令、精神科醫生等報告。

Mongkok Police Station Rapist Pleaded Guilty - 旺角警署強姦案被捕探員梁禮仲在高等法院承認四項強姦及非禮罪

http://eastweek.my-magazine.me/index.php?aid=3121

轟動全港的旺角警署強姦案，被捕探員梁禮仲，上周在高等法院承認四項強姦及非禮罪，法官形容他是個知法犯法的「性獵人」，將案押後至下月十八日，閱讀其精神及心理報告後才判刑。

執法先鋒變成變態淫魔，梁求情時聲稱，因受不住喪父及離婚等家庭壓力才犯案，但本刊追查發現，此案內情絕不簡單，這名曾做臥底的性獵人，原來在調派到旺角前，已有追求報案女子的前科。

更令人震驚的是，卑鄙淫警原來還不只梁禮仲一個，一名曾與他駐守深水埗的已婚同袍，便同樣以追求年輕報案女為樂，兩兄弟經常交換獵艷心得，結果上得山多終遇虎，齊齊因強姦罪成為階下囚。

梁禮仲蔡濟謙常結伴獵艷

深水埗警署一名老差骨透露，梁禮仲本來駐守油尖警區特別職務隊，因經常做臥底放蛇協助破案，表現理想，於○六年獲推薦報讀刑事偵緝課程，同時被借調到深水埗偵緝部值日隊工作，就在那時結識了同樣剛調來的探員蔡濟謙。

老差骨稱，現年三十歲的梁禮仲，九八年入職警隊，在學堂不想理會別人時，便會扮聾，故被同學起了個花名「聾安」；至於三十四歲的蔡濟謙，九七年在警校畢業，花名「十郎」。雖然兩人均已婚，但同好夜蒲，很快便成為酒肉朋友，落更後不時結伴往遣興獵艷。

公開交流獵艷心得

梁禮仲及蔡濟謙二人經常與熟落同袍談論「女朋友」，當中包括一些刑事案件中的事主，甚或是嫌疑人。但這種情況在警隊並不罕見，過去也曾有警務人員因工作關係接觸，跟案件事主發展感情，只要不涉假公濟私，警隊亦無權阻撓。

不過，梁禮仲與蔡濟謙追求報案女子愈追愈上癮，有人甚至聽過他們交換心得。

老差骨更透露，曾發現梁不止一次帶女仔返深水埗警署外，但其時梁已下班，或未夠鐘上班，懷疑他當時是否已曾帶女仔返警署胡天胡帝。

帶返警察宿舍施暴

○八年二月二十七日，玩女玩喪了心的蔡濟謙，終於闖出禍來。他第一次約會在網上結識的十八歲少女時，藉詞幫她非法下載PSP遊戲和教對方玩新遊戲，竟趁妻子及六歲兒子不在家，直接安排對方到其警察宿舍的單位見面。

就在少女專注打機時，蔡借故靠近捉住她雙手，見其沒有迴避，便進一步攬腰，當少女受驚企圖縮開之際，蔡竟用雙腳將她夾實，使其動彈不得，然後一手抱她入房，霸王硬上弓。少女受辱後一度反鎖自己在浴室中，以手機致電友人求助，但電話接通後她卻無法啟齒，於是改發「畀人姦咗」的短訊給對方代為報警。

蔡事後被拘捕並送上法庭，但他堅拒承認強姦罪。只承認自己為人花弗，即使結婚及育有一子，仍有背妻外出偷歡習慣，多次在網上、酒吧，甚至隨便在街識女仔，並帶她們到時鐘酒店尋歡。他並強調，自己用「爆樽小霸王」的網名，跟受害少女玩MSN已三年，二人無所不談，更曾向她發放「隻豬豬都畀咗男朋友仔啦！」的文字訊息，而對方亦回覆「哈哈，係呀！」；另案發時雖然少女曾說「唔好」，但覺得這只是害羞表現，並非抗拒跟自己上牀。

不過，陪審員並不相信蔡濟謙的辯護理由，於今年一月十九日通過裁定他強姦罪名成立，而法官參考其背景報告後，認為蔡是處心積慮利用其警察身份，博取入世未深少女的信任後才犯案，故重判他監禁七年。

同袍好友觸犯強姦罪，梁禮仲不單沒有醒覺，反而一步一步地陷入更瘋狂狀態。

當梁禮仲修讀偵緝課程畢業後，獲正式轉為偵緝探員（CID），並於去年八月調派駐守旺角警署值日隊。他上任不久，便摸熟警署的環境和值日隊的日常運作，但積極的背後，原來是為犯案鋪路。

○八年十一月十四日，牽涉一宗案件被調查的十七歲的少女A，被梁通知到旺角警署助查。雖然A與母親同來，但梁只帶A一人前往位於警署一樓的認人室，且全程一直盯着她的胸部，並說：「你個胸都幾大。」然後捉着A的手及從後抱起她，再掀起其T恤撫摸非禮一分鐘後，梁向她表示已有生理反應，之後便當着她面前自慰，嚇得A立即掩眼。

三日後，梁食髓知味，今次找來在一宗盜竊案被捕的十六歲少女B，約她晚上十一時到警署，帶往認人室後，目光一直落在女事主胸部，未幾即借意把身體挨向她，然後強行伸手入其衣服內，一邊說猥褻話，一邊對她大肆非禮。

兩名受害少女疑因自己有案在身，怕得罪警察會無運行，故即使遭人非禮，亦不敢向人透露半句；可是她們的啞忍，卻進一步助長了梁的獸行。

一日侵犯兩少女

一星期後，即○八年十一月二十四日，十九歲少女X應邀到旺角警署，協助調查她較早前在天水圍報失銀包的案件。當天下午X和男友一同到達，梁禮仲將X帶往警署一間房內閒聊幾句後，便稱同事正忙，叫X晚上十一時再來。

原來當時梁禮仲成功約到另一獵物，就是同年十月底，曾到旺角警署報失手提電話的二十一歲女大學生C，梁以CID「黃Sir」的假身份約她到警署。當晚八時C抵達警署後，便被帶到認人室。

C見「黃Sir」尚未正式辦案，主動跟對方閒談，還問他若自己想考警察，身形是否太肥。沒料此話一出，正中「黃Sir」下懷，馬上對C摸手摸腳，並猛講情慾說話，把C嚇呆。

當「黃Sir」談到做愛姿勢時，更掰開C雙腿及伸手入其裙內撫弄一番，C掙脫魔掌後，以強硬態度要求「黃Sir」報上警員編號，表示要投訴他之後，才獲准離開。 可惜被嚇得三魂不見七魄的C，受辱後只顧慌忙逃走，未有即時就事件作出舉報。

獸行一而再，再而三得逞，梁禮仲已變得色膽包天，同一晚，當X於十一時半重返旺角警署時，他已不能自拔，把X當作其密室的禁臠。

這次他帶X到認人室內的疑犯等候房間，一開始便對她不斷講猥褻說話。說不到兩句，更掀起X的上衣，吻其腰部，X退後避開，但梁沒理會，更跪地撫摸她的大腿內側及吻其腿部。

隔音密室為所欲為

X大驚推開他並叫停，但梁深知該房間既隱蔽且隔音，外邊的人根本不會聽到她的呼救，故不單沒加理會X的叫喊，更強將她推埋牆，繼續對其上下其手及強吻全身一輪後，再將之強暴。

飽嘗獸慾後，梁禮仲被受害少女追問，究竟為何約她到署？他才裝模作樣打開電腦，向對方展示兩張疑犯相片供辨認，然後讓她離開。

X與男友會合後，馬上將受辱一事相告，由於已對旺角警署失去信心，二人立即乘的士返回天水圍警署報案。翌日，梁開始不停發短訊給X，至晚上七時的一個短訊中，更明言願意付十萬元給她，以求她不要指控被其強姦。

惟當X後來多次致電梁，要求約他面談時，當差多年的梁，判斷X已經報案，故一直沒有現身，之後往元朗一間棺材舖匿藏了一天，終因走投無路，向警署一名女文員求助，經對方相勸下自首投案，接受法律制裁。

長做臥底 是非難分

梁禮仲犯下震驚全港的警署強姦案，有犯罪學家認為，可能與他曾長時間擔任臥底工作有關。

城巿大學犯罪學課程主任黃成榮表示，若一名警員曾當臥底，其心理狀態會比普通人複雜，「警員的身份要守法，但臥底的身份卻要用犯法的行為去完成任務，若未能脫離角色的話，令個人身份模糊，漸漸會將犯法的事情合理化，甚至可能會認為自己臥底的功勞，足以抵銷其過錯。」

他續說，大部分重複犯罪的犯人，特別是性罪犯都會「成癮」，不能自控地犯案，甚至喜歡在自己最熟悉的地方作案。

當差先要測心理

有志投考警隊的市民，除要身家清白、體能良好外，明年四月開始還要做足「心理準備」，因為每位申請人都必須接受入職心理評估，以確保其心理素質、適應能力，以及個人價值觀是否適合警隊工作。

其實警隊早於九九年已開始以心理評估，作為內部挑選特別部隊成員的準則之一，成效不俗，故將心理評估計劃推至警員招募過程。

為此警隊已經成立「性格及認知能力評估計劃中心」，成員包括兩名臨牀心理學家，將會隨機抽樣百分之五現職警員，約一千五百人以不記名方式參與評估，用作設定警員心理狀況的基準，來判斷考生是否適合當差。

最少判監十二年

有法律界人士指出，普通的強姦案，一般會判五至六年左右，若犯人有使用武力的話，則會加重到八至九年，但今次警署強姦案相當特殊，被告利用警察的身份，誘騙事主到警署，繼而強姦對方，明顯有預謀地犯案，完全破壞市民對警察的信任，故他認為量刑起點至少十二年。

至於被告另涉三項非禮罪，案情亦十分嚴重，非一般隔衣「揩油」的動作，再加上一項妨礙司法公正罪名，每條罪都可判三年或以上。

更重要是，法官認為被告在開審前才認罪並非真心有悔意，沒有減刑的理由，但該名律師相信，法官最後仍需因應被告認罪，按例作出最多三分一的減刑，但同時又有可能將其他罪的刑期分開執行，故推算被告最終約要坐監十五年。

Lawyer Counsel and Barrister Miss Valerie Tin Tin Lim Had Been Struck Off the Roll of Barristers for Gross Misconduct

Lawyer Counsel and Barrister Miss Valerie Tin Tin Lim Had Been Struck Off the Roll of Barristers for Gross Misconduct

By a Statement of Findings dated 29 April 2014, a Barristers Disciplinary Tribunal found two (2) complaints of professional misconduct against Ms. Lim Tin Tin Valerie (“Lim”) to have been proved. Further, by Reasons for Sentence dated 7 November 2014, the Barristers Disciplinary Tribunal ordered, inter alia. that Lim’s name be struck off the Roll of Barristers.

(Source 1: http://www.hkba.org/the-bar/discipline/bdt/Statement%20of%20Findings%2020140429.pdf)

(Source 2: http://www.hkba.org/the-bar/discipline/bdt/Reasons%20for%20Sentence%2020141107.pdf)

(Source 3: http://www.hkba.org/the-bar/discipline/bdt/index.html)