-13-
R. v. Baxuley (1925) 19 Cr.App.R. 54.
A. 7. Davidson (1927) 20 Cr.App.R. 66.
4.40 to Wed, 31st August. 15 a.m. adjourıment.
12
31st August, 10 n.m. Mesumed.
Jenkin (continuing):
The trial judge himself doubted the propriety of
taking the short cut that he did (p.1).
he said that the charge was an unusual one (p.2).
There was a great mass of evidence.
The trial judge said that the evidence of Zimmern
and Christie contained difficulties, improbabilities,
and inconsistencies (p.5).
If ever there waɛ a case where the evidence should
have been sifted this was one.
What was the state of mind of the jury:
1. The whole Zimnem and Christie evidence was
put to them.
2.
They were directed (p.5) that the evidence was
put in to prove murderous nate and that #risoner
took active steps to murder Fung through other
channels than those by which he was murdered,
They were told that the issue was whether the
risoner employed Lau.
They were told that ere was gap betwe en
4.
the Chui evidence and the "risoner.
They
were given no guidance as to how, in law or
otherwise, the Zimmern and Christie evidence
would bridge the gap.
Can it be denied that they may have thought that on
the Zimmern and Chris tie evidence the Frisoner was likely
have employed Lau, or was the sort of man to have
employed Lau.
17