0003170
G. F. 317
TOP SECRET
5.
Charge (A)1.
2 -
6.
7.
8.
The photographs are good likenesses of HON, CHAN, CHEUNG and YAM and this is admitted by the accused. There is the evidence of these four persons that they have met and been introduced to the accused, though only one meeting took place in the case of CHEUNG and YAM. I accept the evidence of these four witnesses regarding
what
their meetings with the accused as true. HON, CHAN the cordle the
and CHEUNG picked out S/Sgt. CHU Leung in person at an identification parade on 17.11.61, and therefore it is apparent that they knew him. It is not unreasonable to assume in consequence that he knew them. It is not clear why YAM Sai Ping was not put up for identifi- cation on 17.11.61, but notwithstanding this, I accept his evidence that he had been introduced to S/Sgt. CHU Leung at the Ying King Restaurant on one occasion. I consider it is reasonable to conclude that the accused knew YAM Sai Ping. I am of the opinion that this charge is proved and find the accused guilty.
Charge (A)2.
I accept the evidence of HON, CHAN and CHEUNG that they had met and been introduced to the accused, although CHEUNG only met S/Sgt. CHU Leung once. All three picked out the accused at an identification parade on 17.11.61, and therefore it is clear that they knew him. It is not unreasonable in consequence to assume that he knew them. I consider this charge proved and find the accused guilty.
Charge (B)1.
S/Sgt. CHU Leung is a very experienced Special Branch officer; indeed, I understand he has longer S.B. service than any other person in the Force. I believe the evidence of HON Pik Kwong and CHAN Cho Hong that they had met the accused on a number of occasions, and that from what transpired generally at these meetings S/Sgt. CHU Loung must have known they were K.M.T. Intelligence Agents. The accused did not produce any evidence that he had reported the presence of these two Agents in the Colony to his superior officers. The prosecution produced evidence that he had not done so. I consider this charge proved and find the accused guilty.
Charges (C)1 and (C)2.
I will consider these two charges together since the substance of them is the same, the one original charge being broken down into two charges only for technical reasons, i.e. the introduction of the new volume of P.G.O's on 1.9.61.
YIP Wai was not available to give evidence. The evi- dence of CHAN Cho Hong is hearsay in respect of his know- ledge as to S/Sgt. CHU Leung giving information to HON Pik Kwong. None of the documents produced in Exhibit 'C' have been attached to the accused in any way, and neither have any of the written intelligence reports alleged by HON to have been given to him by S/Sgt. CHU Leung been produced in evidence. On HON Pik Kwong's
/3.....
TOP SECRET