Your rof: 1/647/70.
AGC 4/400/65.
Our ref:
irs. E. Elliott,
216, Prince Edward Road,
KOVLOON.
11th January, 1971.
(162)
Madam,
I have delayed replying to your letter of 21st Deccuber last year whilst enquiries have been made into your report that another case of rape by this man was reforred to the Police in Western District. The result of the enquiries is that no trace can be found of any report being received in this police division about such a case, Before roaching the conclusion that this cust bo because the police have suppressed a report, please consider carefully thether you have the slightest evidence for coming to such a conclusion.
-
I foel bound to urge this on you because you appear to harbour the suspicion that the police make a practice of suppressing evidence when submitting case files to this dopartment.
You express shock; presumably because you have allowed this suspicion to crystallize into a certainty in your mind. I find this allegation shameful becauso totally unfounded by anything which you have produced.
Of course the police refer case Files to us when in doubt as to whether sufficient evidence exists to justify a prosecution, and do so in any event in connection with all major prosecutions; and if this is the information supplied to you by "a European policewen in a high position", then it is perfectly correct and morely reflects the proper procedure. It is the Director of Public Prosecutions who decides whether to proceed on any particular case referred to us. If he decides against a prosecution I.commot regard that as an injustice done to the victim of the alleged crime. would go further in the case of the alleged rape of a young girl, and say that it would be very wrong to subject her to the ordeal of recounting her experience in a public court unless it was considered absolutely necessary. I would ask you to consider this aspect of
the matter.
Yours faithfully,
I
AEPLY T REPLIFO BYLY
(G.R. Sneath)
Attorney General (Acting).