Mr. PENLINGTON had been authorised by the Attorney General to sign search warrants under section 17(1) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance; and such a warrant empowering Messrs. MORRIN, MCNUTT, IRVINE and HENRY to enter and search GODBER's flat and motor car, was signed by Mr. PENLINGTON and dated 4th June. The reason Mr. HENRY was brought into the case was because the other 3 officers were junior in rank to GODBER and it was considered proper to have a Senior Assistant Commissioner present during the search.
It was arranged that the Acting Attorney General's letter would be served on Mr. GODBER during the usual morning conference in Mr. DAWSON's office; and this was done by Mr. MORRIN. GODBER was also informed that a search warrant for his quarters and his car would be executed.
As GODBER was re-reading the Acting Attorney General's letter he fainted. As he fell forward, he was caught by Mr. HENRY and placed on 2 arm-chairs. Dr. Frederick ONG was called. The doctor confirmed that GODBER was not ill; and he recovered from his faint in a few minutes. He then phoned his solicitors (Gunston and Chow) and arranged for Mr. GUNSTON to be present during the search of his quarters. He asked if he could telephone to his wife, but he was told that this could not be permitted.
His car was then searched; and in the boot, Mr. IRVINE found 3 loose-leaf paper holders marked "Hong Kong Island", "Kowloon", and "New Territories" respectively. These holders appeared to contain the addresses of vice-establishments in the Colony.
Mr. GODBER's flat was searched on 4th June in the presence of his solicitor, Mr. GUNSTON. In a built-in wardrobe in the main bedroom which contained clothing belonging to Mrs. GODBER the police found a file contain- ing a large number of documents relating to GODBER'S financial resources.
By the evening of 4th June, it was apparent from a preliminary examination of this mass of documents that GODBER's financial resources far exceeded $1 million. Mr. DAWSON decided that he should be put on the Watch List at once. This List (sometimes referred to as the Stop List) is kept by the Immigration Authorities. The difference in the name "Stop" as opposed to "Watch" probably arose as a result of the different uses to which the procedure is put. A department may request the Immigration Authorities to "watch" the departure or arrival of someone and merely "report" to the department concerned. On the other hand, there may be a request to "stop and detain." That was what happened in the case of GODBER.
At 9.35 p.m. on 4th June, Mr. McNUTT, on Mr. MORRIN's instructions, telephoned Senior Immigration Officer Kuo and requested him to put GODBER on the Watch List forthwith. This was done immediately. I have inspected the relevant documents in the possession of the Immigration Authorities at Kai Tak Airport; and it is clear that Mr. McNUTT's request was that if GODBER attempted to leave Hong Kong he should be detained, and that Mr. McNUTT or Mr. IRVINE should be informed immediately. I am satisfied that all members of the Immigration staff at Kai Tak Airport were made aware of the police request. Particulars of GODBER'S passport had been noted during the search of his flat earlier in the day; and these particulars were passed on to Mr. Kuo by Mr. McNUTT.
It was necessary that Mr. GUNSTON should be given photostat copies of all documents seized to enable him to advise GODBER on the preparation of his answer to the Attorney General's letter. The whole of 5th June and part of 6th June was spent photostating these documents; and copies were given to Mr. GUNSTON on the afternoon of Wednesday 6th June.
The Anti-Corruption officers then began a detailed examination of the documents seized. One document in GODBER's handwriting [copy attached to this report and marked "C"] indicated that on 28th May 1971 GODBER'S resources totalled £89,500 approximately, namely:
Total
£35,000 in the United States of America £19,000 in Canada
£14,000 in Hong Kong; and
£21,500 in London
£89,500.
Another document in his handwriting dated 7th November 1971 (copy marked “D” and attached to this report) appeared to indicate that his total financial resources was then £101,000. Another document dated July 1972 (copy marked “E” and attached to this report) indicated that in mid-1972, GODBER's financial resources had risen to $171,900. Finally, although I have not personally scrutinized the mass of documentary evidence now in police hands, by the end of the week ending 9th June, the officers of the Anti-Corruption Office were in a position to say that GODBER's apparent financial resources totalled HK$4,377,248.43. Mr. IRVINE has produced a summary prepared by him and it indicates the following:-
5