這審訊是何麗明被炒魷魚後要完成的手尾, 殊不知這婆娘竟然越玩越大, 前途都豁出去了。她在司法機構當然不能再立足, 因為不給她續約已等同解僱, 她2003年開始私人執業, 現在大律師名冊也見不到她的名字, 即是在本案之後, 她已與法無緣了。任何機構都會請錯人, 請錯可以即炒, 司法機構請錯人也可以即炒或調職, 正如那位明顯針對警察的何裁判官調了去死因庭做審死官, 但即炒也要完成未審完的案件, 除非法官審到中途患重病或暴斃, 才會trial de novo。像何麗明這種情況, 不續約後續審未審結的案件屬正常安排, 她要刻意弄權是極無奈的事, 也不能中途扯她下來。我在兩年半前說(Hello不等於Kitty一文), 本案最佳處理辦法, 把傷害減到最少, 就是以enter nolle prosequi來終止聆訊。上訴庭的判詞第73段敘述了助理刑事檢控專員Ira Lui的陳詞:
73. Mr Lui fairly accepts that, with the benefit of hindsight, the public interest might have been better served by the discontinuation of the prosecution. He however emphasizes that the conduct of the defence remained wholly unacceptable and unconducive to the administration of justice. We agree.
我也曾經批評何麗明對本案辯方大律師梁耀祥發出的拘捕令不合法(法官不合法的拘捕令), 也批評梁耀祥因此接受東方日報的訪問的狡辯, 否認對何麗明講過"Are you insane?" (大狀回應的廢話)。上訴判詞以下的段落已說得一清二楚。
22. The bickering, sometimes childish, sometimes bitter, had hugely disrupted the proceedings and prevented the Deputy Magistrate and Mr Leung from using the time meaningfully. With tension and mutual animosity mounting, it eventually escalated into a most personal insult levelled by Mr Leung against the Deputy Magistrate on Day 40. They were then embroiled in another exchange arising from an objection by Mr Kwan in DW1’s evidence-in-chief. In response to her comment that the defence had not challenged PW2’s expertise, Mr Leung said: “I am afraid I have to use this words: Are your insane? Sorry.” After the Deputy Magistrate said that she would note it down, Mr Leung withdrew the remark. The Deputy Magistrate then said she would consider invoking section 99 of the Magistrates Ordinance.[10]
23. Mr Leung’s crude remark, although withdrawn almost immediately but without any apology, is most unbecoming. Viewed against the continuous bickering preceding it and the context in which it was made, it was more than a personal insult. It amounted to a frontal attack against a presiding judicial officer in ongoing proceedings in open court, thereby undermining the public confidence in the judicial authority that the Deputy Magistrate represented. As such, we consider it a very serious disciplinary matter that the Bar Association should look into. Mr Leung said that the Deputy Magistrate was very difficult to deal with. With respect, when what transpired between bench and bar is viewed objectively, the same can be said about Mr Leung. In any event, it does not detract a bit from the impropriety of his conduct.
