CONFIDENTIAL
5. PARAGRAPH 4 OF TELNO 1000, AND PARAGRAPH 1 OF TELNO 1001.
THE AMENDMENT YOU SUGGEST IN PARAGRAPH 1 OF TELNO 1001 DOES NOT SEEM TO US TO GO FAR ENOUGH TO REMOVE DOUBT. THE POSITION HAS ALWAYS BEEN THAT AN OFFICER ACQUITTED OF CRIMINAL CHARGES MAY BE DEALT WITH ON OTHER REPEAT OTHER CHARGES ARISING OUT OF THE SAME MATTER, WE NEED TO PROVIDE SPECIFICALLY THAT AN OFFICER MAY BE DEALT WITH ON OTHER CHARGES WHETHER OR NOT THEY RAISE SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME
ISSUES.
6. PARAGRAPH 2 OF TELNO 1881.
THE PROVISO YOU SUGGEST IS NOT WORKABLE. FIRST, IT MAY NOT ALWAYS BE KNOWN WHETHER PARTICULAR EVIDENCE WAS BELIEVED OR NOT AND I CANNOT THINK THAT THE PRINCIPLE YOU PROPOSE IS THAT PROVISO (A) SHOULD ONLY APPLY TO EVIDENCE IN RELATION TO WHICH THERE HAPPENS TO BE A SPECIFIC FINDING. SECOND, WE FORESEE ENDLESS ARGUMENTS ABOUT THE CONSISTENCY OF FACTS AND IN SOME CASES AS TO WHAT FACTS WERE FOUND. ANYWAY ON A JURY TRIAL NOTHING WOULD BE KNOWN AS TO WHAT THE JURY BELIEVED OR WHAT FACTS WERE FOUND.
7. ACCORDINGLY I URGE THE COLONIAL REGULATION 62 SHOULD BE AMENDED
ALONG THE FOLLOWING LINES:-
QUOTE AN OFFICER ACQUITTED OF A CRIMINAL CHARGE SHALL NOT BE PUNISHED IN RESPECT OF ANY CHARGES UPON WHICH HE HAS BEEN ACQUITTED, BUT HE MAY NEVERTHELESS BE PUNISHED ON ANY OTHER CHARGES ARISING OUT OF HIS CONDUCT IN THE MATTER, NOTWITHSTANDING THAT THEY RAISE SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME ISSUES AS THOSE ON WHICH HE HAS BEEN ACQUITTED, OR REQUIRED TO RETIRE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, AND THE APPROPRIATE PROCEEDINGS MAY BE TAKEN FOR THE PURPOSE UNQUOTE.
8. PARAGRAPH 5 OF TELNO 1000.
THIS IS AGREED EXCEPT FOR YOUR SUGGESTION ABOUT PROVISION FOR
ENHANCED PENSIONS.
2 -
CONFIDENTIAL
/9. PARAGRAPHS 6 AND 7