CO129-550-7 Rex v. Ng Loi Yuen- appeal to Privy Council 1-1-1934 - 31-12-1934 — Page 33

- 21-

33

That relates to evidence.

I draw your Lordships attention to the fact that this is a mere statasent in the opening speech of Counsel for the prosecution.

I have already shown your Lordships that most, if not all, of that stabement was either corroborated or contradicted by other evidence and unless your lordships wish me to do so, I will not go over that again. The whole question seems to be must the minds of the jury have been influenced or were there sufficient other grounds on which they might have based their decision.

King ▼ iugas. 1 Ur. Anpeal page 234. page 235.

"Conviction will not be quashed if the jury is properly warned against

etc. page 235.

There was accidental mention of these facta and the jury were

properly warned.

BÅDE TE. Arthur Cecil Stratton.. 3 Or. Appeal deports p. 255.

“No twithstanding that the fact that a previous convictim has been illegally etc. page 258. Judgment.

ma

Ur.

R.V. Bertha Julli wan - 3 UP, Appeal Reports p. 265.

Blight irregularity in cross-examination

ply provided against

by the judge is not a ground for appeal. "page 267. Judgement. Half way down the last paragraph. The form of the questions put may have assumed that th statements so put were true do.

R. Y. J.oob Richmond 4 Cr. Appeal Report page 233. page 248. R. K. Thomas Lostes 5 Cr. Appeal p. 193- Head Note Owing to a general másunderstanding on a charge of larceny etc. *

judgment.

R. v. Stroud