A.
•
519
520
321.
344
3421
A.
.
2.
A.
A.
A.
•
I think this is the normal practice.
As far as brothels are concerned do you accept it from me it was not done from any of the witnesses ..1 to P... 148
I accept whatever witnesses are su, posed to have said. They have
seid so.
Therefore it would appear none of those witnesses have alleged at any time brothels were protected in Bay View?
I find this extremely difficult. I don't know which order witnesses
have been called. I don't know what was suid. All I can answer is that they said to me and my colleagues during the course of our
eeing witnesses when brothels were mentioned but whether or not thic evidence has been given I don't know.
It is correct that only mention of brothels has been
Lau Cheong va
It did come from Lau Cheong 2. I am not cure with regard to the
on, brothers,
Would you regard it as surprising that a man actively involved in this conspiracy should again supply information which is borne out neither by investigation nor by the other itnesses in the case?
Certainly
some information supplied has not been verified.
Imci. of it has.
an I correct that the normal practice requires that any investigation whether police or ICAŬ should be fair to accused?
Certainly.
I understand that mr. Lau Cheong wa made several tape recorded interviews to Mr. witeley?
1 have no knowledge of this. Certainly not in my presence.
lio knowledge of fact what they were ade or contente?
I knew Mr. Whiteley had seen Lau but how it was made or recorded I don't know.
I also understand transcripts of their interviews were regared?
A. I think it would be most likely. I have not seen them.
→
Un a need to know basis it may well be other information would be included which may not concern your group?
This could well be.
That part of the information contained in these interviews relating to this investigation was supplied to you, was it not?