CO129-541-11 Cheng Kwok Yau- trial judge's notes 1-1-1932 - 31-12-1932 — Page 6

6

by evidence of another.

There could be no case here of any defence on the

part of Lau's principal of accident or mistake.

If it is proved that I have incited a man to

kill another there is no possible defence, except

insanity. There is no question of motive.

The “continuous hate" said to be proved by the

Zimmern and Christie evidence is irrelevant until

there is proof that the Prisoner did actually incite

Lau. It is an attempt to prove the charge by evidence

of the Prisoner's state of mind, which cannot be done.

The Zimmern and Christie evidence was thrown to the

jury without any reservation, and they were told that

they might find on it that the Prisoner was

quilly-

they might * * K**XX**X gakkkx infer that the

accused was the kind of men to commit the crime

charged.

Kem.C.J. That was never said.

Sheldon also objected.

Fouter: I did not mean that. They were told that they

might infer that the accused was "the man".

The whole suggestion to the jury was that if

the accused could do this thing.

Sheldon here interposed and the sentence was not

finished.)

That

The first step in the Zimmern and Christie

evidence was t of the plan to assault fung.

was a distinct offenoe. It is irrelevant.

The second step in the Zimmern and Christie

evidence in the $10,000 offer, and the discussion

about poison.

Then there is the evidence of the walk to the

ferry, the ferry, the breakfast, the Tung Shan Hotel,

the purchase of poison and a syringe, the chicken