Three Hong Kong police officers claimed they found drugs on man, but they never searched him
- Trio handed 10 weeks in jail for perverting the course of justice after video shows they never searched man’s trouser pocket they said contained drugs
Three Hong Kong police officers who gave false statements claiming they had seized drugs from a man despite never searching him were jailed for 10 weeks on Friday.
Kwun Tong Court heard how sergeant Ng Shiu-lung, 44, and police constables Joe Tang Man-cho, 34, and Lee Hin-lai, 31, had reported finding a packet of suspected drugs in Siu Chi-pong’s right trouser pocket as they recounted his arrest, which took place on December 20, 2016.
But security footage showed the officers never searched the pocket in question.
Instead, the video captured Siu taking out an unidentified object from that pocket and handing it over to the police before making a throwing gesture towards bushes behind him.
Two of the officers were then seen searching the bushes, where they apparently found the alleged drugs.
Siu was arrested on suspicion of possessing dangerous drugs, but the charge was dropped the following January before his case reached trial. The full facts of the incident were therefore not established.
However, based on their false claims made in police notebooks and statements, the three officers were found guilty after their own trial last week of perverting the course of justice between December 20, 2016 and January 22, 2017.
In mitigation, defence counsel Michael Leung acknowledged the offence was serious but asked for suspended jail terms, if not an “absolute discharge” of his clients.
He argued the case was unique because it lacked aggravating factors such as causing an innocent man’s conviction or a guilty man’s acquittal, taking bribes, or assaulting a pedestrian with a baton.
“There was no evidence to suggest [my clients] planted evidence,” Leung said. “[Siu] deserved it ... There are no victims in this case.”
The counsel also said his clients were of good character, commended by their superiors and supported by colleagues.
“A harsh sentence would impact police morale,” Leung added.
But deputy magistrate Philip Chan Chee-fai noted the Court of Appeal had clearly pointed out that such an offence could have serious consequences such as a deterioration of the judicial system and a loss of confidence in the police force.
Chan said officers had a “weighty influence” on the judicial system as they testified in court every day.
“The court has to punish and deter such acts, and reflect the public’s disgust,” the deputy magistrate said.
A suspended sentence would therefore be inappropriate, given the seriousness of the offence, which usually warranted immediate imprisonment, Chan continued.
A starting point of 12 weeks in jail was adopted before Chan reduced it by two weeks to account for the officers’ clear records and contributions to the community, as well as the impact of the case on their families.
All three officers immediately indicated an intention to challenge Chan’s judgment, and were subsequently released on bail, pending appeals.
