learned trial judge said:-
(h)
(i)
(j)
"Of course, the last few pages of the 3rd accused's statement, if true, are totally damning. 'We three were rather hard up and had no money. It was reminded of Mr. Teyfour, that he always paid cash. when he bought goods, and had a lot of money with them. I would check and see if he was in Hong Kong. We intended to go to his room and rob him. Decided to have a meeting at my house the next day to plan the robbery', and the whole of what is page 11, in both the English and the Chinese, including an admission that the 1st accused had brought two choppers to the briefing meeting, and the 3rd accused asked if it was really necessary to have choppers, and the 1st accused said that sometimes they had to be used in an emergency, and so on."
"The Crown said that this 3rd accused
knew perfectly well that highly dangerous weapons were going to be taken on a robbery, and might be used if necessary to effect the robbery or to effect an escape, and that that might involve doing very serious bodily harm, if not worse.
"If you thought that the 3rd accused knew that these weapons were being taken on a robbery, but that they would not be used to do serious harm, but only to do rather minor bodily harm, something less than serious bodily harm, you could convict him of manslaughter. If you thought that he only imagined they would be used to threaten,
if you could believe that, then I think you should acquit him on the murder charge altogether, and of course, you would be free to convict him on the robbery charge if you are satisfied that he knew that a robbery was going to take place. It all depends what you are prepared to believe as to the 3rd accused's knowledge and attitude of mind. Mr. Ozorio (counsel for this Appellant) asked you to say, as one limb of the defence, that it looked from the statement of the accused, if
-11-