CO129-541-11 Cheng Kwok Yau- trial judge's notes 1-1-1932 - 31-12-1932 — Page 9

9

of the Accused.

Sheldon:

Is it the intention of the defence to submit

that there was a mi sdi rection in law?

Potter: It is so intended. That is a question of law.

Kemu.C.J: I reserved that point subject to whether

it is a question of law which can be raised.

Potter (continuing): The sum ing-up: Passages objected to:

For "bridge

P.5

: F.1 (agreed). .4 (very important):

the gap, substitute "prove the agency of Iau" :

"Kurderous hate" and "active steps....through other

channels" it is scarcely arguable on the ones that

either point is admissible. F.5, "and so on", no

suggestion that they should stop anywhere.

To kemp C. I. "Without reservation". By that I mean

that the Zimmern and Christie evidence was never stated

as being relevant to any particular issue, as, for

instance, in the "Armstrong case".

2.30 2.3.

12.30 to 2.30 - adjournment.

Potter (continuing) : Law.

9 Halsbury, p.380.

If the Crown prove that the Accused employed Lau,

then even "murderous hate" is irrelevant.

13 Halsbury, pp. 437, 439, 447.

F.437

"That end" is the very end, and "the act"

is the very act. That passage, p.437, was quoted by

the Crown. That passage and the cases refer to case:

of direct murder. Here, the alleged fact that the

Accused went round the Colony, expressing hate against

Fung, at a date subsequent to the completion of the

act charged, i.e., the procuring of Lau, could not in

given until the statements are connected

my case

with the crine.

If Lau's agency is proved the came