'A'
'B'
'C'
'D'
see ENCL. ENVELOPE
LAST
CONFIDENTIAL
A1 63 64
R&R.
مساس
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S CHAMBERS
HONG KONG
73
RC-
A. C. Stuart, Esq., C.P.M.,
Foreign and Commonwealth Office,
Hong Kong Department, Downing Street,
LONDON, S.W.1A, 2AL.
Dear Andrew,
28th February, 1975.
RECEIVED IN
REGISTRY No. 51 Being
- 3 MAR 1975
HKK 14/1
Denys Roberts has asked me to reply to your letter of the 6th February, reference HKK 14/1.
on fuited
h
18/3
Mrs. Elliott wrote to 3 newspapers here on 30th and 31st January about this case. A copy of her letter is enclosed and marked 'A'. I replied to her letter on the 5th February. A copy of my reply is enclosed and marked 'B'. Mrs. Elliott replied to my letter by further letters to newspapers on the 14th February. A copy of that letter is enclosed and marked 'C'. I have just replied to that letter and a copy of my reply is enclosed and marked 'D'.
I am sorry that I have not replied sooner to your letter. The reason for the delay has been that I wished to include 'D', the drafting of which was delayed by pressure of other work.
The disclosure on the morning of the trial that Mr. CHAN could not have committed the crime with which he was charged came as a considerable shock to us. It is an extraordinary case. The discrepancies between the facts known to the Police and those in Mr. CHAN's statement con- firm, in the light of what we now know, that he made up the details, but I can add for your information that there is some vague ground for suspecting that he may have obtained some knowledge of the robbery from other persons (not police officers) who may or may not themselves have been involved. A triad connection is a possibility. I do not think it worth saying this publicly to Mrs. Elliott.
If you wish, I can send you the report of the police officer who looked into the matter. This, of course, includes Mr. CHAN's statement to him in the presence of his legal adviser and a Crown Counsel. From Mr. CHAN's statement, there is no doubt that he made the statement about which Mrs. Elliott wrote, and he explains clearly how he made it up and why. He claims that he was assaulted and made the statement because he was afraid. Unfortunately that issue remains unresolved. As my letter shows, the decision in