CO129-541-11 Cheng Kwok Yau- trial judge's notes 1-1-1932 - 31-12-1932 — Page 40

40

In less technical language a similar statement of the law

is to be found in 9 Halsbury "Laws of England", p.380,

par.740

The evidence must be confined to the facts which

*constitute or are connected with the offence charged

"and proof cannot is generally be given of other facta

"which have no connection with this offence.

If.

"hʊsever, there are other facts which are so inex-

'tricably mixed up with the facts which constitute

"the offence charged as to form one transaction,

"proof may be given of such other facts.........All

"the details of the alleged criminal tranɛaction are

"relevant to the case for the prosecution as being

"part of the res gestae and should be proved."

The learned muthor in 13 Halsbury "Laws of Ingland", p.437,

par.609, also states:-

"In testifying to the matters in issue

witnesses

*must state them not in their barest possible form,

"but with a reasonable fullne...s of detail and circum-

"stance."

"

A judicial statement of the doctrine is contained in the

judgment of Kennedy J. delivered in the re ort of R. Y.

Bond (C.C.R.) 1906, 2 K.B. at page 400:-

"The general rule *(i.e. the rule excluding prior

"criminal conduct of the accused from the evidence)

*cannot be applied where the fasts which cɔnɛ ti tute

"distinct offences are at the same time part of the

*transaction which is the subject of the indictment.

"evidence is necessarily admissible as to aats

*which are so closely and inextricable mixed up with

"the history of the guilty not itself as to form

"part of one chain of relevant circumstances, and so

"could not be excluded in the presentment of the cas S

Page 40Page 41