401
626
11th December 1975
378.
627
Coran: A. Garcia, D.J. in Court.
Court resumes at 10.30 a.m.
Appearances as before.
A
-
Mr. Hampton: Representations which I would like to put before our Honour. They have been ventilated both before and during this trial it is at this stage in the trial that the disadvantages suffered by the Defence are highlighted the first of these is the question of particulars and it is through the complete inadequacy of the Summary of Evidence provided and indeed the massive deviation of the evidence actually adduced from that summary coupled with various matters which in the words of my learned friend were left to emerge in the course of the evidence that the Defence has been hampered and prejudiced. The second matter is the question of separate trials of the charges and at this stage we can see one instance of the prejudice suffered by the Defence is that the accused persons are not in a position to give evidence as they would wish restricted to a single issue - question of conspiracy because of the inclusion in the indictment of other charges. Thirdly even at this stage the indictment on charge of conspiracy remains defective with alleged co-conspirators known to the Crown not included therein. Because of a combination of these factors on behalf of the 1st Defendant
am calling no evidence.
an
Mr. Gunston: Am calling no evidence. Implied by scction 56 of Criminal Procedure Ordinance that when no evidence is called on part of Defence Crown does not have a right to a speech 56(2)(b). This contemplates if Defence has given evidence. It is silent if Defence does not call evidence.
hr. ceats: As I understand it function of prosecution in making final address is seeking to marshal evidence adduced no probative value at all and prosecutor is only assisting the Court does not wish to
defeat the Defence case. Feel that prosecutor in case where issues
Complex are complete, has duty to address Court. There is a considerable body