27
8.
12
I'm prepared to give matter consideration.
Nature of evidence financial lineage to conspiracy at Bay View Police Station through period stated in charge. Both Defendants have been shown copies of bank drafts upon which Crown will rely as showing financial lineage to conspiracy. Certain person who purchased bank drafts will give evidence. Certain other bank evidence shown to defence. If copies not in possession defence will be put in possession before trial. Defence will in no way be prejudiced. Mr. Gunston supplied with bank documents re his client. Remainder of documents will be supplied to defence. Defence can't claim not full details of charge. Charge same as in Hammersley case. No roquest made to formally supply particulars therefore in application to come to Court for an order..
2.
Re separate trials. Not dealing with case of overt acts and bringing substantive charge based on overt acts whilst bring a conspiracy charge. Substantive evidence. 40 different dates bank drafts purchased.
Within period stated in charges 1, 2, 3 and 4 arrive at a later stage. Where pursuant to S.14 (1)(b) of Prevention of Bribery Ordinance both Defendants required by I.C.A.C. to disclose property sent out of Hong Kong by them over a period of time which embraces conspiracy charge. relation to 2, 3 and 4 evidence Statutory Declaration did not disclose drafts that were sent out of Hong Kong for benefit of two Defendants same evidence will arise re last 3 charges as will be led in conspiracy charge. Only additional evidence being production of Statutory Declarations to show omit any mention of their particular drafts.
In
Production of Statutory Declarations will be last evidence produced at trial. All evidence before admissible re 1st charge and where Crown established that D1 was directly or indirectly beneficiary of drafts that evidence will be admissible to, charges 2 and 3 where
prosecution established D2 was beneficiary directly or indirectly of
certain drafts. Evidence admissible on conspiracy and 4th charge.
be no possibility of any mistakes occurring. Not a case of making overt acts into substantive acts and at same time trying conspiracy charge at
same trial.
Can
13
Mr. Hampton replies:
My learned friend stressed not a situation where Crown charge