Magistrate, lawyers slammed for scandalous 91-day jaywalk trial

The Court of Appeal has criticized a former magistrate, two defense lawyers and a prosecutor for wasting judicial time and resources when a jaywalking trial that was supposed to last just two days dragged on for 91 days.

Former deputy special magistrate Ho Lai-ming had originally ordered the two defense lawyers - Kelvin Leung Yiu-cheung and How Chun-fai - to pay a total of HK$622,199 for court costs. This triggered an appeal.

The Court of Appeal yesterday ruled in favor of the defense lawyers and ordered the defense and the prosecution to pay only their share of the costs.

In their written judgment, three Court of Appeal judges - Jeremy Poon Shiu-chor, Derek Pang Wai-cheong and Anthea Pang Po-kam - said they are "dismayed" that such a "simple, straightforward two-day case involving a very minor traffic offense had evolved into a leviathan of a 91-day trial spanning nearly two years."

The judges added: "The way in which the trial meandered sluggishly to its eventual conclusion, the fragmentation of the trial process, the unwarranted delays and disruptions, the constant procedural distractions, the prolix and unnecessary cross-examination, the frequent digress from the real issues to peripheral matters, the scandalous exchanges that the deputy magistrate had with Leung and How, fueled by mutual disrespect and animosity, and the disproportionate use of judicial time and resources, are unseen in the long and combined experience of this court."

They said the case has seriously affected public confidence in the criminal process.

The judges said Ho and Leung had constant bickerings in court, making them "abandon decorum and professionalism" when doing their job.

"The deputy magistrate had failed in her duty in properly managing the trial to bring it to a just and speedy conclusion; and that the defense and, to a lesser extent, the prosecution, had also failed in their duty to assist the deputy magistrate in reaching that goal and standard," the judges said. All of them are responsible for "the wastage of judicial time and resources."

Therefore, the judges said, the legal costs of over HK$622,000 should be split by the defense and the prosecution.

But the judges said their decision on the legal cost did not mean their approval of Leung's and How's conduct.

Instead, the Bar Association and the Law Society should examine whether the two should be subject to disciplinary action.

The defendant in the jaywalking case, Thapa Kamala, then 37 years old, was charged with negligently endangering her own safety as a pedestrian in 2017 after she was hit by a taxi on Tai Tam Road in April 2016.

She was acquitted in 2019 after the trial and applied for the legal cost, but it was rejected by the Court of Appeal yesterday.

"In our view, by crossing the road ... at that time of the night when she could have used a nearby pedestrian facility, the defendant had brought suspicion upon herself for the offense of endangering herself as a pedestrian," the judges said.

"She is therefore not entitled to the costs of the trial despite the acquittal."

wallis.wang@singtaonewscorp.com