3
Certain of Your Petitioners have ascertained that before the said Keung Tsze Pan had been committed for trial by the magistrate the said Keung Sau came to Hong Kong and saw Mr. Lo Kwok Min, a clerk in the office of Messrs. Russ and Company, with reference to giving evidence on behalf of the said Keung Taze Pan, and was informed that if he had no money with which to pay for the defence of his brother nothing could be done, that he had better return to the country, and that the Crown would assign solicitors and Counsel to conduct the defence at the Sessions. The said Keung Sau accordingly returned to his native village.
It was not until Monday evening the 17th of September 1934 after the conclusion of the first day of the trial that the said Keung Tsze Pan was asked by his advisers as to the reception of the deceased woman into the family house, when he at once replied that his mother and his brothers in the country could give evidence to prove the reception of the deceased woman into the family house and the ceremonies and observances then performed and carried out.
Steps were immediately taken to send a messenger to the Village of Ku So in the country to obtain the necessary evidence, and the said Keung Sau the eldest brother of the accused arrived in the Colony late in the evening of the second day of the trial, viz., the 18th day of September 1934 and was called to give evidence at the earliest opportunity on Wednesday morning, the 19th day of September, 1984.
According to the Laws of the Ching dynasty (Chapter 26) and Chinese Custom still prevail- ing a man is justified in killing his wife or concubine and her adulterer on finding his wife or concu- bine and her adulterer together under circumstances which clearly indicate adultery at the place where they are discovered. The reason being that Chinese regard the chastity of the wife and con- cubine as of the utmost importance and any lapse on the part of either of them brings dishonour and disgrace to the parents and the whole of the family of the husband.
If reference is made to the two statements of the said Keung Taze Pan, one made within a
very short time after the commission of the crime and the other after his discharge from the Kowloon Hospital when charged, it will be seen that he has never made any attempt to deny the crime but gave his reasons for the crime, namely, "they have robbed me of my wife" and in the second "the woman was my wife and he (the man) had carnal knowledge of her".
Your Petitioners mention the above as tending to show the mental attitude of the said Keung Tsze Pan with regard to the Chinese Law and Custom, and that from the time of the actual commission of the deed to the time of his second statement, the provocation to which he had been subjected was uppermost in his mind.
Your Petitioners do not question the right of the jury to have returned a verdict of murder but they submit that under all the circumstances there is sufficient to warrant Your Excellency in exercising clemency and commuting the sentence of death to imprisonment.
Your Petitioners humbly pray that Your Excellency may be pleased to take into favourable consideration the facts mentioned in Your Petitioners' humble Petition and beg that Your Excellency will be graciously pleased to exercise the prerogative of mercy vested in you and commute the death sentence to one of imprisonment.
And Your Petitioners will ever pray as in duty bound.
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Hong Kong,
October, 1934.
15
36.
SIGNATURE
ADDRESS
OCCUPATION
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.