CO129-541-11 Cheng Kwok Yau- trial judge's notes 1-1-1932 - 31-12-1932 — Page 210

210

*

i.e. "we are not - certain"

Now, on that, gentlemen, you could, I think,

reasonably find that the accused is guilty of the crime

charged against him; that, of course, is on the assump -

tion you believe both branches of evidence. If you do

not believe the Zimmern and Christie evidencet that is

to say, if you are not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt

it is true, even though you may suspect it may be true;

if you are not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that

the Zimmern and Christie evidence is trus, then, in my view,

the verdict must be "not guilty", because, as I have

pointed out, the Chui evidence - though it takes you to

the accused's own door stops short of the accused him-

self..

If, on the other hand, you come to the conclusion,

on the Chui evidence, you are not satisfied beyond reason-

able doubt that Lau is the man who organised the murder,

again, I think, the case is at an end, and perhaps even

mor el clearly, because the charge is the procuring of

the murder by Lau.

So it comes to the three points I put at the

beginning.

Are you satisfied beyond reasonable doubt

that Lau was the man who organised the crime as agent

for somebody else?. Are you satisfied beyond all

reasonable doubt, in spite of all the difficulties in

the evidence, that the accused made the definite state-

ments attributed to him by Zimmern and Christie? If

the answer is "Yes" to both questions, then you may, I

think, reasonably find the prisoner guilty. But equally

reasonably you might say, "even that does not satisfy us:

If that is we are not certain".

•

the answer to either of the first two questions, I

Page 210Page 211