貪4500元 警司淪階下囚
官斥「全無悔意 謊話連篇
警方：考慮紀律處分
警方發言人表示此案屬個別事件，強調對警隊貪污「零容忍」。警方將於法律程序完結後，考慮對黃冠豪紀律處分，黃現時仍然停職。
官質問「同冼錦華有何分別」
昨日庭上座無虛席，被告黃冠豪（51歲）不少同袍及親友現身支持，部分記者更因座位不夠，被安排坐到犯人欄內旁聽。裁判官謝沈智慧劈頭便問，黃冠豪與免費嫖妓而被判囚2年的前高級警司冼錦華有何分別。辯方大律師陸偉雄回應，冼案涉及警察嫖妓，比本案嚴重，又指被告只因「流水作業」處理酒牌申請，一時「睇漏眼」才犯錯。
呈60求情信 官:好的1封就夠
辯方呈上60多封求情信及嘉許信，撰寫人包括前高級助理警務處長、中聯辦保安科及美國駐港總領事館等（見另稿）。裁判官表示，好的求情信一封便夠，否則呈上1000封亦枉然。下屬則盛讚黃熱中工作，只因工作繁重才會「睇漏眼」。裁判官反駁：「乜叫忙？好忙又點可以訂（食飯）訂7點，但6點半鐘就到？」
辯方：盡心服務官：有支厚薪
辯方聲稱，即使被告不反對酒牌申請，亦不代表食肆必能獲批酒牌，而且被告過往盡心服務警隊，「無功都有勞」。裁判官聞言怒斥，「警察唔好成日犯事走上法庭，話佢服務社會，佢唔係免費服務社會，they are well paid for it！（他們獲得優厚薪酬）」。辯方回應，被告即使不能「一功抵萬過」，但都不至於「萬過蓋往功」。
辯方又說，此案為單一事件，被告背景及品格良好，案件勢令被告失去工作和長俸，故請求法官判處緩刑。裁判官反問：「呢個係邊個錯？全部都係佢（被告）咎由自取」。裁判官續說，冼錦華案後警務人員本應以此為戒，被告卻「帶埋酒牌小隊一齊去食，個個一齊（對無牌賣酒）視若無睹，個個都睇漏眼，put them on the position of conflict of interest（把他們置於利益衝突的境地），影響埋下面班細」。
判囚1年 即時監禁
裁判官認為案件沒任何求情因素，判被告即時監禁。辯方隨即向法庭申請保釋等候上訴，卻遭裁判官拒絕。黃得悉難逃入獄命運後目無表情，轉身默然向親友道別。
根據案情，銅鑼灣食肆「辰田食棧」於前年7月申領酒牌，有份處理申請的灣仔指揮官黃冠豪，於同年6至8月3次與朋友及同事於辰田用膳，接受免費酒水和折扣但未有申報。其中一次晚膳的費用約為2200元，但被告結帳時只需付379元。
【案件編號：ESCC2192/12】
(7.6.2013 明報)
最漂亮的法官Adriana罵起人來都幾巴辣，20多年前她剛從英國回來，第一次見她的印象還歷歷在目，美麗又友善的小姑娘，湊巧大家都帶同一牌子的手錶，於是話匣由手錶打開。辯方大律師陸偉雄(Albert)官仔骨骨，20年如一日，台型十足，風度翩翩。被告也一表人才，具大將之風。可惜明報沒有講誰是主控，不知是怎樣的人物。
法官這判刑相當重手，被告一定會就定罪及刑罰上訴，第一步當然是向高院申請擔保。
本案屬典型的以權謀私案。以權謀取便宜飲食，是警察及食環署衛生帮最容易濫權的事。法官雖然重手，但一針見血。這件案向社會傳達清晰的訊息，這就是撈油水的下場，本案本質上跟冼錦華案相若。甚麼看漏眼，不知該食肆沒有酒牌全是廢話，當然是那一間等出牌就吃那一間，才會招呼週到，吃二千付二百。以前可能是結賬付二百，找回二千呢。如果可以把曾湯繩之於法，對社會傳達到的訊息便更加清晰了。我們只有默默期待。
辯方又說，此案為單一事件，被告背景及品格良好，案件勢令被告失去工作和長俸，故請求法官判處緩刑。裁判官反問：「呢個係邊個錯？全部都係佢（被告）咎由自取」。
回覆刪除I dont really agree with her reasoning. Every convicted is 咎由自取. If this is the reason that he should not be granted mitigation, then no one should be granted mitigation.
She was a bit agitated and not calm enough. The mitigating factors should be taken into consideration though the court does not feel they are very strong. There are aggravating factors as well since the deft is a policeman. She was carried away by her emotion. It is difficult to forecast if bail pending appeal is successful but the sentence may eventually be halved. This is a case of factual finding. Unless the magistrate's statement of findings is not well written, to overturn the conviction is not easy. Of course, it depends on which judge to hear the case.
刪除Newman Wong.
回覆刪除Thank you. Newman is a good bloke and is very capable. He is on special fiat to prosecute then.
刪除I guess the magistrate was simply disagreeing with the submission that the conviction would already be a sufficient punishment as his future and career would have ended by it that a probation would be appropriate. I think the magistrate was right in this case because the defendant was a high ranking police officer and he was found lying in the court. If the court doesn't make it clear that what the defendant did is intolerable, it would send the public a very wrong message. His outstanding performance in the police force was already reflected by his position in the force and his remuneration. I fail to see how that could be a mitigating factor.
回覆刪除Well, a mitigating factor is always a matter of how much weight you can put on it. For some other points, I have no dispute about Adriana's observations though I feel the sentence is excessive.
刪除Actually, I am not really concerned with the mitigating factors. But I think her statement "全部都係佢（被告）咎由自取" fails to show the reasons put forwords by Mr/Mrs 匿名.
刪除Hey, this kind of discussion is never ending. Perhaps we just wait until we see the appeal and then we can understand more about the reasoning.
刪除I also feel the punishment is a bit too heavy
回覆刪除up to now i still have reservations he intentionally solicited advantages before grant of liquor licence. The judge went a bit far to suggest he is the ‘most unscrupulous’ deft she had ever seen.i am sure there are far wicked defendants out there
i note this judge is notable for her harsh penalties . i am interested , though , statistically if her judgments were frequently overruled by upper courts
I cannot give you statistics or impression about her cases being overruled because normally the name of trial magistrate is not mentioned.
刪除1.In cases like these, what can be the mitigating and aggravating factors?
回覆刪除2. Could Wong be convicted if he had made a disclosure of the benefits he had received?
3. Could Wong be convicted if the restaurateur was not applying for a licence?
It’s not often I find myself uplifted by judgements from what I call “law and order“judges. This time I feel A. Ching has brought out the more chilling of the evils (pronounced as “ E-Ville-s” if we were to learn English from 楊鐵(歪)樑爵士); and that is the epic and endemic phenomenon of 無恥.
回覆刪除Frankly, this type of “corruption”, though must be guarded against, caught and punished, is to my mind just the “garden variety”. It is human nature to want to go to shops where we get preferential treatments. Not just the VIPs who wants to be treated as VIPs, even my grandma used to frequent market stalls where she’d be given better/more 葱 or oranges. We do sometimes expect a lot from our public officers in our society. However we should also bear in mind the context in which the offenders had fallen. Here I read there was an ex-police officer serving in the restaurant. But more relevantly, how does the society view the legal infraction of the restaurant the superintendent was ignoring? The licensing law/procedure in Hong Kong had been known to be totally unrealistic. I don’t know about now but years ago, given the rentals in HK, it was an accepted fact that one had to operate at first without the appropriate licences even for the otherwise most proper operators. A while ago, Kirin (the then No.1 beer company in the world, in terms of sales) opened Kirin Plaza in Patterson Street. For the first few months, they couldn’t get the liquor licence and a newly off- the- boat inspector from England decided to charge the manager and the serving waitress with the appropriate offence on “charge sheets” as opposed to summonses---how oppressive and what travesty. The defendant in this case was charged with “misconduct” rather than “corruption”, so there need not be proof of tit-for-tat or “general sweetener”. Don’t get me wrong, he was there for jackso and was rightly convicted.
What bugs me a lot more than their succumbing to jackso, was their (defendant’s and his witnesses’) concerted and determined strategy to defend the case. And it is this 面皮厚過 the Kardashians 屎忽肉 that is not sexy but chilling. The higher their positions the lower their 良知. Now this is the e-ville, I’m talking about. Remember楊鐵(歪)樑爵士 said …….具骵上, 我我我……我講過 D乜嘢….我我我…真係真係…唔記得啦. That was when he was asked what he had said to張俊生 at a dinner. The latter had quoted 楊爵士s comments to him on the Hong Kong justice system at the said dinner party. Around that month, 楊歪 had sent the witness who claimed to have forgotten events in a楊受成 related trialto prison for 4 months. Both that witness and Sir Yang were lying. One went to prison and another was encouraged to run for the 1st CE of HKSAR.
How did it come to be like this----- these people instead of having better人格 and discipline come to expect us to find whatever狗屎 they spew out, we will find it to contain士多啤梨香味? 梁振英, 陳茂波 林奮強……..
One reason is that they have fighters on their side---- 葉劉淑儀 羅范椒芬 王國興 ……How did police come to be like that too? My belief is that over the development of many similar cultures, the釘官s have a tendency to identify with the authorities and in many ways become consciously or unconsciously警察之友, in the end police had such high opinion of their own credibility, they think they pee only mineral water. Just look at Tsang Wai Hung’s face and what comes out of it. This sort of occurrence is aptly borne out by Bill in his short story襲警 (小說) (1/2011)---how in the story練雪楓 claims to be able to sleep better by saying she was in the washroom at the material time is beyond me. All I can say is that people can conveniently have childish or even Mickey Mouse morals.
And that’s why for A Ching to point to the crap that was displayed was indeed a快事.
I once had lunch with a lady judge at a restaurant I knew well. As we sat down, I introduced her to the manager saying “this is Judge So&So, the most beautiful lady judge”. She said to me, “Sterling, 你千其唔好卑 Judge X and Judge Y 聴到呀!佢哋嬲死你呀.”
回覆刪除Sterling,
刪除In the first place, why should you introduce the judge to the manager. Why don't you just say this is Ms something?
I wonder if anyone will listen to TL Yang's English for 1 minute sort of program, you are certainly better than him or I should say many people are far better than him.
I don't know what to say to reply to your comments. A story may convey certain personal value of the writer and don't be bothered by this value. It is not a philosopher selling certain school of thoughts.
Obviously the superintendent exerted his power over the granting of the licence and he was able to get the sweetener. He should avoid going their if he had any potential risk of conflict of interest. A regular customer of course would expect some favourable treatment. If you go to the restaurant to order seafood, you would like to make sure you will not be raked off on weight or on freshness. There is nothing wrong but not for the reason that you make use of your power to get favour. They are two different things. I remember once my photos were in the newspaper frequently, I stopped patronizing certain shops I was familiar with. I never told people what I did when I bought things from them. One can consciously avoid these kind of "jackso". I remember once I was on a PLB. I had my coins ready to pay the fare when I reached my destination after lunch. The driver told me he recognised me and told me no need to pay the fare. I told him Mr Driver, please help me by accepting the fare. Minor matter like this can reflect one's mentality.
It would have been my convoluted thinking and writing that had caused you to think I was criticising the author`s value regarding 練雪楓. Or you are just being defensive or proprietorial (maybe she was based on a real person—haha).
回覆刪除I, amongst most people who know you, know that you have a very high integrity and moral rectitude. Maybe that`s why for the past 25 plus years, I have enjoyed your friendship and acquiesced to the element of Gor-Gor-ness on your part. I am conceding Dee-Dee-ness although I’m already a 年過半百老翁, but by the way, a word of advice here, Bill, stop using Botox, it`s not good for you in the long run.
Anyway, to clarify what I was saying, I can say this. I do not find this type of abuse of power tolerable or excusable; I just find it easy to understand. What did outrage me was the way and efforts he orchestrated his defence. A Ching picked up on that and I was trying to draw attention to it too.
This 2nd aspect of the case is also an abuse of power but this time he was rightly and delightfully told that this abuse was only an abuse of a power that exists in his and his witnesses’ head---their poo did not have the fragrance of strawberries, at least not simply by virtue of the positions they held.
The finding of the defendant’s 1st abuse of power was an irresistible inference, particularly so when he ran the defence that they didn’t pay attention to the bill amount despite such huge discount (this is what I called his 2nd abuse of power).
What I was trying to allude to yesterday without much clarity was the human nature aspect of abuse of power simpliciter and how it can creep up on you quite innocuously, at least it seems so at the time. The monetary kind of jackso is relatively easy to guard against. (What about fruit plates or糖水?) The power in abuse of power come in many forms and guises: official (public and private) capacity, social positions, knowledge …… and last but not least (the newly accepted English word) guanxi. (Karl Marx was certainly right in his criticism of capitalism, though呂奇and 鍾祖康 have their own separate theories) Imagine the treatment a baby of a high ranking and well-liked doctor of QM might received at QM. Another example from襲警 (小說):… 警長1387…..車停在正門，把警察行車紀錄簿放在車頭顯眼處，以免抄牌。畢竟開的不是警車，抄了牌要申請取消告票，多一重麻煩。So can the defence people do that? No? What about Legal Aid people? On which topic, why are government vehicles given the specific prefix AM in the 1st place?
Finally as I was typing the bit about lady judge yesterday, I did realise the problem you raised, but only some 12 years after the event. I realised the unthinking spontaneous exchange at the time was automatic self image and perceived image promotion. Not quite pure/good. I hope it’s not an abuse of power or you’d think less of me. Can I plead 呂奇 defence.
Of all people, I have recently learned this from Ms. 張柏芝: 錯就要認, 打就要企定.
My dear friend, I never use Botox. The natural thinking in me not even take supplements. Maybe you feel that I do not grow old. The photos in the blog were taken a few years ago. Botox is never a vocabulary in my family or within my peers. I know you are kidding me. But still, I should clarify for avoidance of doubt.
刪除The female protagonist in the story is only a creation. I do not project any real character in life into it. I was thinking then in a story there should be a love plot. As for the parking outside court, it is a norm I was talking about back then.
Innocuous seeking of favour has nothing to do with abuse of power. The restaurant would like to provide dessert or fruit plater to familiar customers who frequently visit the shop. There is nothing wrong with that. If the policeman is a such a customer, he is no difference from any other ordinary citizen. He does not wrong. The demarcation line is always difficult to draw. A person of high integrity will not make use of his position or power to draw favour. Unfortunately, even Donald Tsang practised such favour drawing feat.
To guard against abuse of power is not easy because most of the time there is no clear evidence. It is an attitude rather than a behaviour. Government personnel in authority should avoid job related connection to get "jackso" and it can guard against people offering it to you too.
By the way, what is 呂奇 defence?
唔係我錯,係社會錯---actually there is some merits in this rather elegant phrase, ie, there is a lot wrong in the surrounding culture.
刪除Thanks Steriling. It is a good motto when we cannot rationally find fault on anything else.
刪除It's even handier when we want to shift blame from ourselves.
刪除Seriously though,I think it coined as a simplified indictment against societal ills, without the dialectics of people like 柏楊,鍾祖康 et al, bear in mind in the early 60s, the intended mass audience did not find it vogue to engage in 論術.
It was not only handier a few decades back. The entire social system was very different then. There was valid ground to make such an accusation and shift the blame.
刪除黃冠豪入獄四個多月後已獲准保釋等候上訴。如果定罪上訴不成功的話，被告在高院獲改判即時獲釋的機會大不大？
回覆刪除另外，據報被告針對定罪的其中一個上訴理由是廉署在餐廳檢獲一張寫有「酬謝黃司飯宴」的單據明明是hearsay，卻被控方呈堂用作盤問被告。不知這個上訴理由成功的機會大不大呢？
陳官 (Andrew Chan)批准保釋其中主要的理由是判刑上訴成功機會大，我想最後判刑好可能是半年，加入服刑期間行為良好再扣假期會是4個多月，等如即時釋放。單據是現場檢獲證物，內容雖然不能直接prove the truth of content, 用作盤問而作出的答案可以用來evaluate credibility and nature of the meal, 像賭外圍檢獲的馬纜，可以呈堂以證明bookmaking activities.
刪除