CO129-541-11 Cheng Kwok Yau- trial judge's notes 1-1-1932 - 31-12-1932 — Page 19

19

-15-

he is charged with the second burglary.

Can it be doubted

that evidence of the first burglary would be admissible.

The rule against the admission of evidence is that

you cannot prove the crime against "A" by evidence of a

crime against "B".

Again, suppose Frisoner had incited Zimmern and

Christie to shoot Fung that night if he escaped the

by Lau.

poison to be administered to him,

defence that would be inadmissible.

According to the

Again, if Zimmern

A

and Christie were engaged to remové Fung's dead body to according the Mortuary, that evidence would be admissible to the

defence because it is no crime to remove a body to the

mortuary.

13 Halsbury, p.447, para.621.

Phipson, 7th Ed. 133.

It would be a remarkable thing if a man coule go

about threatening to kill a man without that evidence

being admissible.

Phipson's Manual, 59,

Therefore, the evidence is admissible, firstly under

the head of Lotive, e.g., statements that Fung had taken

away his girl, that Fung was a rotter and would be better

dead, and that he had employed men to beat up Fung.

It is also admissible on the means and op;ortunity

ground, e.g., that he attempted to procure Christie by

offering him f10,000, that he had a trusted ohauffeur

who would drive Christie away after the murder, and that

he had other men shadowing the Accused.

•

It is also admissible under the preparation ground:

the purchase of syringe and poison, the experiment

on the chicken.

It is also admissible on the threats ground:

the dagger incident.