343
518
320.
d.
3.
A.
4.
A.
A.
A.
A.
.
scading out of yourself as a reasonable an, do you find it Jur rising?
I find this impossible to answer. I have no view on this matter. - was given information which I was not able to verify but because
I could not verify it, it does not say it is false. I failed to
verify it.
Temably you used the utmost diligence in endeavouring to
verify it?
Yes.
And do you agree that fact that no verification is forthcoming
renders it possible that this information is incorrect?
1 leads me to believe that this information must not have been
correct.
In these circunctances, would you agree that because this information is on the balance of probabilities incorrect it is more consistent with a person having heard gossip or rumour rather than that person being personally actually involved in that respect?
I don't think that is a question I can give an answer to. As I see it you are asking me to give an opinion of how somebody else came into possession of information I don't see how I can answer
that.
As regards interview on 19/9/75 you informed 1st Defendant you were investigating alleged offence, etc. First offence which you put to him was a conspiracy within Bay View Folice station for protection of gambling brothels and drugs?
Ies.
where did you acquire te information upon which you based those
introductory remarks to 1D?
These were based on witnesses who had already given evidence.
ou are probably aware that none of the witnesses have mentioned the protection of brothels within Bay View Division'?
I don't know. I have not been in Court.
You may take it that none of the witnesses mentioned protection of brothels in Bay View Folice Station?
Yes.
It is Counsel's duty for prosecution where a witness differs from his statement and in material matter he should inform Counsel for
Defence of this?