The body in the bag
The remains of a corpse was a drugs-related murder
By David Cocksedge
On 1ST SEPTEMBER 1979 a green canvas bag was found washed in
from the sea onto a remote beach at Castle Peak in Hong Kong. A
construction worker that first saw it noted a foul smell coming from the
bag and alerted local police. The bag contained a grisly mixture of a
human skull wrapped in adhesive tape, a human pelvic bone and several ribs
which clearly showed that the body had been hacked to pieces with no
particularly skill. Both lower limbs were detached and were missing. A
local pathologist determined that the remains were those of a male aged
between 25 and 40 years old.
The Hong Kong Homicide Bureau combed
through hundreds of files of men who had been reported missing in recent
months. The skull was photographed and the prints shown to many people,
and they were also put on show outside police stations in the British
colony (as it was until 30 June 1997).
The first breakthrough came when
the wife of one of the missing men told police that she thought she could
recognize the ear-lobes, teeth and the nose of her missing husband, Peter
Chan Woon-hing, who was 29 years old.
The Chinese woman named Wong
Suet-hing was only 17 and had been married for only a few months. She was
shown the picture of the skull again in much better lighting - and was
certain that it was that of her husband. It was lucky for local police
that Chan Woon-hing had told his young wife a great deal about his
dangerous and illegal profession. She now revealed that he had been
engaged in trafficking hard drugs to Europe and that he had been fearful
of a revenge killing because one of the gang involved believed that he had
been double-crossed. If this was the body of Chan, his fears had been well
founded.
To ensure positive identification Detective Inspector Li Sung
of the HK Police took the skull to London to be examined by the
distinguished criminal pathologist Professor James Malcolm Cameron (see
“Shootout at Smiths Club”, True Crime, January 2003). Li also took a
photograph of Chan when he was alive. This had been taken in the Hong Wong
studio by a photographer who confirmed that it had been shot from a
distance of about 14 to 16 feet using a flash bulb. These details were
important because Professor Cameron had to prove identification by
superimposition. The technique he used was to superimpose the negative of
the skull over the positive of the face and then fit the pair together
using the eyes, ears, nose, mouth and cheekbones as points of focus.
Professor Cameron, working with his photographer Ray Ruddick
produced enough points of similarity to state that the skull indeed
belonged to the man photographed. He also discovered a bruise on the
skull, which was from a heavy blow delivered one minute to five minutes
before death.
Now that the victim was positively identified Hong Kong
police began a full-scale investigation of one of the colony’s most
gruesome murders. The trail was to lead to France, Holland and back to
Hong Kong.
Chan’s wife revealed that Chan had flown to Holland a few
months earlier with a consignment of heroin, which he had handed to a
distributor. He waited three days for the money to be paid, as has been
arranged, but was then told that a rival gang had stolen the drugs. The
heroin had been handed to a man named Chan Wai, and, under the rules of
the drug smugglers, it was his responsibility to pay compensation to the
men that Chan was working for. But despite heavy pressure on Wai there was
no money forthcoming and Chan Woon-hing returned to Hong Kong. Whilst he
was planning to return to Amsterdam to collect his money he was asked by
another drug dealer, Siu Chi-Kai, to take over another consignment of
heroin to France, and he agreed. Siu Chi-Kai and another man bought five
pounds of the class one drug and recruited a courier (a “mule” in drugs
slang) to carry the package. The young lady recruited was thought to be
ideal as she was unknown to the Hong Kong police and wanted to go to
Europe to work as a croupier or a hostess. She was to receive US $3,000
for moving the heroin to France.
Kong Lai-king was an attractive
26-year-old woman who had worked in Kowloon bars and in the Golden
Majestic Escort Agency. Chan’s associates packed the drugs in a suitcase
with a false bottom and in May 1979 four gang members plus Ms Kong
Lai-king flew to Paris from Hong Kong. They left in two groups and
arranged to meet at a hotel in Holland after the heroin had been sold in
France.
But at Charles de Gaulle airport their plan came unglued. Ms
Kong walked to the customs hall into the “Nothing to declare” lane, but a
French Customs Officer noticed her nervous manner and decided on a routine
search of her suitcase. The false bottom and the heroin were quickly found
and she was placed under arrest. Kong Lai-king was later found guilty by
the Tribunal of Dobigny in France and sentenced to six years in jail. Her
subsequent appeal was denied.
The other gang members had seen the bust
in France and flew on separately to a pre-arranged meeting place in
Amsterdam. Once there they again tried to locate the man who had bought
the earlier consignment. Chan managed to collect 9,000 guilders on account
and remained in Holland to collect another 10,000 guilders. The rest of
the gang returned to Hong Kong and found that the backers of the
enterprise were furious and thirsting for blood.
Siu Chi-Kai and his
partner, Li Kwan-fan who had both put up the cash for the heroin, found
out that the drugs had been seized in Paris. And they also learned that
Chan Woon-hing was suddenly in possession of a lot of money. Siu refused
to believe that the drugs had been seized and became convinced that Chan
had double-crossed them. He approached a friend named Tam Ho-kin and asked
him to recruit some hit men to ensure Chan's death. As Li and Siu were
unable to put up enough cash for the hit, the three men had a long meeting
and planned to carry out the killing themselves. They then went to a
fortune teller in a temple to find an auspicious day to go through a
religious ceremony which would bind them together as brothers in this
bloody enterprise.
Chan returned to Hong Kong not knowing that 7 August
1979 was the day set for his execution. He was invited to a flat in the
On-Look Building at Yuenlong to discuss further skag* deals, and walked
unsuspectingly into the trap. When the killers suddenly fell on him, Chan
struggled and shouted loudly until Siu cracked him hard on the head with a
wooden pole. He collapsed and died minutes later. This was too much for
Tam, who fled the scene. The two others then procured a meat-grinder and
proceeded to dismember Chan's body and with a chopper strip the flesh from
the bones. This was fed through the grinding machine and then flushed down
the toilet in the flat. As Chan's head and bones could not be put through
the grinder they were packed into two traveling bags and dumped in the
sea off Butterfly Bay. Sea currents later swept the green bag containing
the head and torso to Pillar Point where it washed up on the beach. The
second bag was never found despite an extensive search in the waters off
Hong Kong by Royal Navy divers.
Tam Ho-kin turned States’ evidence
during the following trial. He had been part of the murder plot but had
refused to take part in the disposal of the body. Tam testified that after
the killing he was at a dinner party and saw Siu Chi-Kai and Li Kwan-fan
changing the dressings on each other’s fingertips which had been sliced
off when they were stuffing Chan’s body into the grinder after the murder
on 7 August.
Both men were charged with murder and tried at the High
Court of Hong Kong in October 1980. Professor Cameron traveled from south
London to give vital evidence on the identification of the victim’s skull.
He was questioned and cross-examined for over two hours, mainly on the
superimposition technique. This evidence was crucial to the Crown’s case
and was heard for the first time in a Hong Kong court. Cameron was also
asked about the use of a meat cleaver for the chopping of the bones and
the removal of the flesh from the bones. He stated that in his opinion,
neither of these operations would have been difficult if carried out by
determined men. Further forensic evidence at the murder scene also heavily
implicated the three killers.
The court was satisfied that the skull
was that of Peter Chan Won-hing, and the two defendants were found guilty
of manslaughter and jailed for eight years apiece. This verdict was very
lenient considering that Tam's evidence pointed clearly at a case of
premeditated murder - “Murder in the first degree” or “Murder One” in
American legal parlance. (When they saw the wealth of evidence against
them, and heard Professor Cameron's testimony, defense lawyers decided to
plea bargain). Two other defendants were sentenced to ten years each for
conspiracy to traffic in hard drugs and a fifth defendant was acquitted
for lack of evidence.
To help prove the drug conspiracy two French
police officers also gave evidence at the trial, the first time that
French policemen had talked on the record in a Hong Kong courtroom. The
Frenchmen handed into evidence the heroin which had been seized in Paris
from Ms Kong Lai-king. The consignment was said to be worth two and a half
million Hong Kong dollars. On the day that the killers and the drug
traffickers went to Stanley Island Prison on the colony, the heroin
literally went up in smoke. It was burned by the Hong Kong police.
(*: ‘Skag’ is criminal underworld slang for heroin)
(Research: “Clues to Murder” by Tom Tullett, Grafton Books, 1987).