applicant.[1] Further, he accepted that the adjournment was granted so that he could give evidence in the trial of the applicant. Then, there ensued the following exchange between Mr McNamara and Jacky Ma:[2]
“Q. Now, you obviously expect to get a benefit, a reduction in the Court of Appeal as a result of having given evidence against the accused in this trial.
A. You may say so, but I want to clarify one thing first. I made an application for—I asked for leave to appeal after I had already been sentenced. I appealed for leave to appeal out of time only more than a year after this. Since, well, it was over a year later before I made the application because I didn’t—I was not aware that implicating or giving evidence against Wun Shu-fai could be used as a ground of appeal.
Q. But you now know that, don’t you?
A. Now I know that.” [Italics added.]
69. Subsequently, the following exchange ensued:
“A. When I agreed to give evidence against Wun Shu-fai it was the time I had already pleaded guilty. The then prosecutor told me through my representing counsel and asked me whether I was willing to be a witness.
Q. Yes.
A. At that time it was on my mind that to do something to compensate the victim of this case. That’s why I agreed to be that witness and that was my intent to be a witness. Well, I only came to know in the prison after I had already served in there for over a year from others, from my friends in there, that this reason could be used as a ground of appeal.
Q. How much time do you expect to get off for giving evidence against this man?
- ↑ Appeal Bundle, pages 113 S-114B. Also, see the judgment of this court in HKSAR v Ma Shun Yick (CACC 314/2012; unreported, 19 June 2015).
- ↑ Appeal Bundle, page 117 B-G.
