Charles Warwick Reid在1989年10月因貪污被廉署拘捕，警誡之下，除了否認，便不會多講其他說話。他獲得保釋，但沒收了旅遊證件，他擁有的資產怎樣都解釋不了，所以只有一條路可走------着草。
1989年12月一個晚上在長洲，Reid及其他幾個人，籌劃逃亡大計。與會的人包括一名前任的裁判官N.A，當時已私人執業，也包括在律政署及私人執業的律師及另外幾個並非律師的人。N.A.這人是個賤人，做裁判官的時候控辯雙方都沒有人喜歡他，他總是滿臉輕藐和不屑，喜歡嘲諷人。我印象最深的有兩件事，第一次在N.A.席前檢控一宗船員在遠洋輪船上偷打字機的案，船名叫PNG Traders，非法律界人士見到這船名當然不懂得笑，那時標少是新丁一名，面對N.A.的惡劣態度，不敢過份駁嘴。當他罵我的時候，我就擰轉頭望觀眾席，當他罵別人，當然這樣做也惹他罵。他問我為何背向他四處望，如果當年標少不是新丁，而是做了三幾年，說不定我會講，"Your Worship, I am looking for justice."你可能不相信我會夠膽這樣講，你可以看看我寫的《剛正不阿》之一 ，文中提及當時在場的簡定濤(Andrew Kan)，現在在高院代表陳振聰，有機會問他還記不記得這件事。從這件事可見，有人找標少「開片」的話，我隨時奉陪。另一件關於N.A.的，是他私人執業的時候，代表當時10多歲現在是紅星的男演員，為了在排檔爆竊的控罪「講數」，如果不是N.A.代表他，這明星可能有不同下場。
N.A.做過裁判官，一變臉就可以是逃犯的同謀，當年的法治，可以很兒戲。selina在上篇留言問我，「香港有冇法官試過受賄被控（王見秋單嘢應該唔算掛)」，我答她「香港法官受賄被控就無聽過，法官被控妨礙司法公正有Alexander Lau, 走咭數兼走佬有McInnes，訂報幾年唔畀錢有王式英，呃綜援有Jackson-Lipkin，夜蒲灣仔左擁右抱，已退休，我以前同佢老婆頗熟，今隱其名。後3者都是High Court Judges，死未！所以不要怪我寫嘢sceptical，我看justice並非lip service那種。」。
另一個當晚在長洲的是solicitor Alick Au。我在法庭上見過他幾次，他每次都認罪，他告訴我，因為我好難搞，他怕了我，所叫被告認罪。從案例看，Reid的逃亡由他一手策畫。他因協助Reid逃亡，被控串謀妨礙司法公正罪判監4年。審訊時Reid以supergrass身分指證他。漁船從長洲駛到澳門，之後開車入大陸，在1990年1月中安排假護照，貼上Reid的照片，名字叫Cheung Wing-kin，由白雲機場經香港飛馬尼拉。Alick Au同時是香港輔警總督察，他陪伴Reid飛往馬尼拉，大陸移民局由他打通，香港transit那一關怎過，不得而知。Reid認貪污後以特赦證人身分指證Alick Au，受盤問的時候，"Reid admitted that he was corrupt, unscrupulous and dishonest"(CACC000470/1992)。Reid指Alick Au及另一位同謀收了他1,000,000元安排他逃亡。到了馬尼拉，Reid請了手持輕機的body guards保護。
p.s. I did not mention N.A.'s full name because I do not remember whether I actually heard his name mentioned in court as one of the co-conspirators, or I read his name somewhere or I was told by a SCMP reporter. He was not charged eventually. He is still earning his living in HK, There is no mistake about his involvement. I got my revenge when he was in private practice and we did have a few encounters.
'船名叫PNG Traders，非法律界人士見到這船名當然不懂得笑'...真係不懂得笑, Blog主可否解解?
回覆刪除PNG in court language means Plead Not Guilty. Likewise, PG is the acronym of Plead Guilty. The defendant in that case PNG. Unwittingly, the ship was also called PNG Traders. The defence counsel are all PNG Traders whenever the defendants PNG.
回覆刪除I thought of P&G...
刪除原來如此, 又學到嘢, 謝謝
回覆刪除各行都有自己的術語，上庭做criminal trial，見到辯方律師，當然會問「你單嘢砌唔砌？」「點plea法？PG定PNG?」
刪除「當年的法治，可以很兒戲」，導致它改變的最大原因會是什麽？
回覆刪除I have no answer. I would try to address this in the end. Reid's case apparent was an isolated incident but from it, so many directorate officers were dragged into it and dragged down by it in the Legal Department, I felt/feel the terror. I will divulge more soon. Materials are too fragmentised to write.
刪除It would be very interesting and useful if we can identify at which point and by what factors, the situation started to change, for better or worse. 1989 was not that far from 1997, did something happen during those 8 years and strengthen the rule of law in Hong Kong, or was it an undergoing trend that only began to show with the rise of the next generation? The scientist in me is intrigued.
刪除I will try to draw my conclusion and see if other people can chip in. It is also important we do not freely associate an isolated incident to a bigger political picture of the handover. Sometimes, individual behaviour may not suffice to lead us to draw any conclusion at all. If it does, it should be an academic study rather than a blogger's rambling view. You have every quality to do such a paper, not me.
刪除Assuming the principle of rule of law is well established around 1997, because the popular feeling is that it has been going downhill ever since. We will need to survey at least 3 groups of people in the legal profession: your generation, the previous one, and the one after you, to see if there is a converged answer. Then we need to survey the same age groups without the legal profession for control. Then we need to see if there was any objective event that supports the converged answer. Then we need to examine did it really go downhill since 97. And the toughest thing of all, we will need to define rule of law.
刪除This is really tough work and I think it will probably take 3 persons to write the paper and a load of students to handout and collect the survey and input data. I believe this is some Nobel prize material. If some scholars are interested, contact me.
Sorry to interject. People tend to have selective memory. I think the HK society as a whole has more freedom than the colonial days (except may be the Patten years, but that is also debatable). As for rule of law, I don't think there is any identifiable critical moment of deterioration. My feeling is that it is largely the same pre- or post-1997. Just my 2 cents.
刪除C,
刪除What about critical moment of improvement?
That's why we need to find real historical events to see if they match the answers; otherwise, it could just be purely psychological. Yet, if the majority of the people in the legal profession believe rule of law has been entrenched, it will be here to stay. The answer could just well be the collective psychology of the people working in the legal system, while there is no substantive change at all.
This is of course a tough nut to crack because the legal system does not work with data and precedents are made by individual judges. That's why this kind of studies would be so much fun and exciting. You can't see me, but I'm having a nerdgasm right about now.
How to define rule of law scientifically is also a huge pain in the bottom.
傳媒監察、法律知識普及、透明度、社會進步和所有人的努力！
刪除Exji
Shall take a look at this
回覆刪除http://hub.hku.hk/bitstream/10722/28045/1/FullText.pdf?accept=1
I partly relied on the facts in this thesis but generally do not agree with the view of the author. Thank you anyway.
刪除"I got my revenge when he was in private practice and we did have a few encounters."
回覆刪除I look forward to you telling these exciting storys.
Wai,
刪除I will not elaborate how I took my revenge. Personal grudges in court are not worth mentioning in the blog.
王見秋做法官時係咪判錯好多寃案?
回覆刪除沒有特別印象。
刪除