'Arsonist' clears his name after 10 years
Man wins appeal to overturn charges convicting him in 2003 of setting fire to bins
PUBLISHED : Thursday, 24 July, 2014, 4:57am
UPDATED : Thursday, 24 July, 2014, 4:57am
Julie Chu [email protected]
Mr Justice Louis Tong said his concern was focused on the case's evidence, and the credibility of Lam's confession.
A man who lived under the shadow of an arson conviction for a decade had his name cleared yesterday, after a High Court judge reviewed the trial records and found the evidence insufficient to find him guilty.
Lam Shing-chi, 26, was just 16 when he was convicted in 2003 in Kowloon City Court for setting fire to three rubbish bins at Ho Man Tin and sentenced to 12 months of probation.
Although Lam admitted his participation to police, he was only a schoolboy at the time and had given his statement without his parents by his side as he had not told his family about his arrest, Mr Justice Louis Tong Po-sun noted in the Court of First Instance yesterday.
He did not appeal the conviction until this year, prompting Tong to remark it was "rare" for an appeal applicant to try to overturn his case only 10 years later.
Such a move would cause the courts and the prosecution lots of difficulties, the judge said.
"However, my concern was focused on the case's evidence, the statement Lam gave under caution and the credibility of his confession, and I finally decided to give him a chance," Tong wrote in his judgment.
In quashing the conviction, the judge said he had asked for the court records and requested the trial magistrate, Abu Bakar bin Wahab, to provide a reason for his verdict as a reference.
The court heard that Lam and another man, Lau Chun-fai, were suspected of setting the bins alight at Chun Man Court on July 6, 2003.
The pair were charged with three counts of arson. Lam was convicted of two of the charges.
Tong noted that according to the records, a security guard who had witnessed the incident said he had seen only one man setting a fire that night.
A police investigator also said he believed Lam was merely present at the scene, but did not take part in the crime.
The judge said that if the prosecution wanted to prove Lam and Lau committed the arson jointly, it had to show Lam had "encouraged" the crime or acted as a lookout.
However, these elements were not found in his confession, Tong noted.
He said Wahab had arrived at his verdict based on Lam's confession to the police, which was not sufficient to find the defendant guilty.
He quashed Lam's conviction on the two charges.
