3.
asked Mr. Topley, the Director of Education to rescind the 35
warning letters and to give a full disclosure of the findings
of the investigation as the sum of money involved in the con-
viction was only $27,930, about 10% of the total that the tea-
chers estimated to have been embezzled.
The delayed announcement
It was two months after Sister Leung Kit-fun was convicted
in court that the education Department announced on April 4;'
1978 that the Precious Blood Order had put $320,000 back into
the school account on March 2, 1978. It was obvious that the
Precious Blood Order had violated clause 58 in the Code of Aid
which forbids payment, under any circumstances, of Government
moneys into any bank account other than the school's.
However,
the Education Department has not yet disclosed how such a vast
sum of money was obtained and channelled into another account.
The delay in the announcement, in fact, corresponded mischievous-
ly with the carefully devised plan to lay the groundwork for
the eventual dismissal of the old teachers who exposed the finan-
cial irregularities of the school.
The 7 warning letters
On April 3, five warning letters were sent to five teachers
of the school, and two more were sent to the teachers on April 12.
All the letters were signed by the supervisor, Sister Lorraine,
who was never present when the incidents complaineu of in the
warning letters occurrea. The matters complained about, were
mostly so trivial as not to appear justify official warnings.
The letters claimed there was "evidence" of teachers' misbeha-
viour dating back to when the school started in September 1977.
The evidence had been meticulously collected and saved for use
for that very moment because the financial affair had come to
an end, and she began to have the free-hand to dismiss the old
teachers. If she had dismissed the teachers before the announce-
ment, it would definitely have been interpreted as an act of re-
34