12.
-4--
141
applicant.
course.
The Governor ordered that the law should take it s
(12) On the ninth day of November 1934 a letter was
written by the applicant's solici tors to the Colonial
Secretary declaring an intention to apply for leave to
appeal in forma pauperis to the Privy Council.
was accordingly stayed, and so remains.
Execut ion
(13) On the twenty-ninth day of December 1934 a letter was
written by the applicant's Solicitors notifying the despatch
of a petition, a copy of which is forwarded herewith.
(14) The following inaccuracies in the petition should be
noted :
(a) para. 2; the date should read "l6th"
(b) para. 3; the dates should read "20th, 21st and 22nd"
(c) para. 4; the dates should read "20th, 21st and 22nd "
(d) para. 5; the dates should read "5th, 6th and 7th"
(e) para. 6; the dates should read "5th, 6th and 7th"
(f) para. 11; the dates should read "8th, 9th, 11th
and 12th".
These inaccuracies have been pointed out to the applicant's
Solici tors.
(15) It is considered that the one substantial point in the
appeal to the Full Court may be found in the question whether
Counsel for the Crown's reference to Mary Pine's evidence in
his opening, so gravely prejudiced the accused that the
special jury were unable to dismiss the prejudice from the ir
minds.
(16) the authorities cited at the hearing of the appeal by
Crown Counsel on this point are of some assistance, especially
Driscoll, 20 Cr. App. R. 161, and the Full Court rejected
Counsel for the appellant's argument there on. The view of the
Law Officers of the Crown in Hong Kong is that this decision
was correct.