CO129-550-7 Rex v. Ng Loi Yuen- appeal to Privy Council 1-1-1934 - 31-12-1934 — Page 130

-21- 22.

133

verdict of "guilty of manslaughter". If on the other hand you say

"Well, I am satisfied that he had been drinking, but there is no

evidence to satisfy me as a reasonable man that he had drunk more

than was sufficient or perhaps a little more than sufficient to

inflame his passions, to screw his courage up to the sticking point,

to inflame his wicked perverted idea about racial conflict," then

that is no matter of excuse at all, and I repeat,it is throughout

of for the accused to satisfy you beyond reasonable shado doubt that

he had so impaired his reasoning faculties by over indulgence in

alcohol as to cause the mental condition which is sufficient

to reduce his offence.

Let me remind you of the accused's own story. Take his

statement to the police "I was drunk, I was unconscious, I had

a wound too." I agree with the statement made to you by Learned

Counsel for the Crown that all but the first three words should

be disregarded because they may be later reflections, conclusions,

made any time between his arrest and the time of his being asked

to make a statement. Really the statement comes to this. "I was

drunk". It errs on the side of brevity. It does not tell us a

great deal, and when he makes a statement in this Court he says

"I am not used to taking intoxicating liquor, on that day I had

plenty of it, I don't know what happened to me afterwards. That

is all I have to say". That is what the accused has given you.

We know from the combined evidence of Dr. Valentine and

Mr. Branson that the accused had been drinking. We know that

a specimen of urine taken at the hospital on the 22nd June after

accused had been down the nullah and had been taken out and tak en

to the hospital, was subjected to a quantitative analysis by Mr.

Branson the following morning, when it was found that there was a

certain amount of alcohol in it. We are told also by Dr.Valentine

that that amount is not, in his opinion, speaking as an expert,

anything like sufficient to indicate any substantial departure from

sobriety. Remember, he said" nothing less than 250 mm. per 100 c.m.

would make me say a man was really under the influence of alcohol."

Page 130Page 131