CO129-541-11 Cheng Kwok Yau- trial judge's notes 1-1-1932 - 31-12-1932 — Page 16

-12-

5.

An inadequate sun ing-up is worse than none at mil.

6. There must be a direction as to what bearing

the facts have upon the issues in the case.

77.

8.

In particular, where evidence of other tranɛ-

actions is admitted, there should be an express

direction as to the legitimate purpose for

which that evidence may be considered by the jury.

When there is any circumstance, such as here the

conditional pardon, affecting the value of

witnesses testimony, it is most important to

warn the jury as to the effect of such testimony.

R. v. Cohen (1909) 2 Cr. App.R. at 207.

R. v. Hilliard (1913) 9 Cr.App.R. at 175.

R. v. McGill (1914) 10 Cr.App.R. at 268.

Fractically no summing-up.

R. v. Baird (1915) 11 Cr. A p.R. 186.

Other transactions.

Special di: ection necessary.

F. v. Finch x (1916) 12 Cr.Ap. .R. 77.

R. v. Hamilton (1917) 13 Cr.App.R. 32.

B. v. 1⁄4wing (1919) 14 Cr.App.R. 71.

R. v. Bartlett (1920) 14 Cr. App.R. 157.

R. v. Bailey (1924) 2 K. B. at 305.

R. v. Smith 18 Or.App.R. at 20.

Accomplice, not yet sentenced.

R. v. Hayton 18 Cr.App.R. 169.

Kass of evidence: sifting.

A. v. W ruhall 18 Cr. App.R, 164,

Something in the sun ing up to suggest that

Frisoner was the sort of person.

8. r. Fox 18 Cr.App.R. 192,

Inadequate summing-áp.

R. v. Benton (1925) 19 Cr.App.R. 33.

16