50
måtted, subject to any decision of the Judici ml
Committee of the Privy Commeil should they grant
special leave to appeal. In the second place,
the defense urged that the Zimmern and Chris tie
evidence was not worthy of credence.
The jury
must have substantially believed it, and indeed,
in spite of all its difficulties, it is hard
imagine that the essential parts of it were fabricated.
The defence seemed to suggest that Zimmern and
Christie invented the story in order to save them”
selves, but they were not in the slightest danger
on the murder charge unless something of the kind
of thing which they described had in fact taken
place. In the third place, the
the defense suggested
that the Zimmern and Christie evidence, even if
both admissible and true, did not in any way tend
to prove that the prisoner was the person who ɑm-
ployed Lan to organise the marier. I think that
it did so tend, as a matter of ordinary, COLON common
sense, re as aming. There was quite sufficient
evi de nee that Lau had, as the agent of some one
else with money at his disposal, organised the
marder of Pung. He was the prisoner's chauffeur.
Fung had no known enemies except the prisoner.
It seems to me in the highest degree relevant that
the prisoner had used marderous mpressions about
Tung, said that he had men "watching" Fang, told
Zimmern of the failure of the abortive attempt on
the night of the 19th March, and tried on the 21st
Warch to incite Christie to kill Fung, intimating
Page 50Page 51