¡
- 5-
207
in the course of his evidence, state that Lau was present
on that evening, and, of course, the defence point to
that as an attempt on his part to drag in Lau. As I
say, his final answer here was that Lau was not present
in the street at all that night. There was undoubtedly
very great inconsistency and wavering, and probably un-
truthfulness, in his answers in regard to that evening,
but in spite of that, I think you may reasonably find
it is for you to say that his evidence does reasonably
establish the fact that the person who procured him and
Wong to commit the murder was Lau.
•
Lau's association with the others is spoken to
also by Cheung Ka Mau. Lau himself has not come forward
here to deny his partici,ation in the crime and I think
you might reasonably find that Chai's evidence does
reasonably establish that he was the man who procured
Wong and Chui to commit the murder, and that he must
have been doing so on behalf of someone else because he
was able to pay out $2,000 for the crime.
I think also you might reasonably say you are
not satisfied on that points that you are not satisfied
on the Chui evidence that Lau was the man who procured
the murderers. Then, I think, the case is at an end,
because the charge is that the accused, through Lau
procured the actual murder.
Assuming, on the other hand, you believe that
evidence, that Lau was the man who procured the murderers,
you have a trail of evidence leading back from the murder
up to as I might express it the accused's own door,
leading up to the chauffeur employed and paid by the
accused. That, I think, would itself al early be in
insufficient to bring home the charge to the accused.
There is a distinct gap between that Chui evidence and
the accused.