"

369

whether the

prisoner

had been, as he

6.

alleged, struck with a stone, which

question she answered in the negative.

کچھ

It turns out however that

some material facts entirely escaped the attention of the Court and of the Jury. butting aside whatever additional evidence

an ar

Attorney might or might not have.

out

for the

been able to ferret

prisoner (such as his usually carrying this chopper. :that it was used by him at his daily work s.) it appears that two Government Officials, the Colonial Surgeon and the Inspector of Police, could have contradicted the evidence of the witness Chun Amui on the not unimportant statements she made respecting the sickle and the stone,

The Colonial Surgeon D' Ayres (who

unfortunately

was not examined at the trial) states that when he saw the prisoner : he had a number of scratches and grazed places about the head, abrasons hardly

more than sufficient to draw a few dreps

of blood, but

on

his forehead

sealp round. one inch shorter wound half

running

long

tvas

with

an inch long

a

a.

into it and this sealp wound

which Dr atyres

saw

bleeding

he is

prepared to swear was beyond all doubt caused by a blow of a stone.

7.

Inspector Swanston who

arrested the accused at Shaukiwan says

ort

his

he pointed out two wounds head. We (the Inspector) got the Key of

Share This Page