CO129-550-7 Rex v. Ng Loi Yuen- appeal to Privy Council 1-1-1934 - 31-12-1934 — Page 79

- 7 -

79

we consider that it was the only rational conclusion they

could have reached, and that there was therefore no mis-

carriage of justice.

We will now consider the points of alleged Misdirection

taking first the allegation that the Trial Judge in his

Summing Up did not state to the Jury with sufficient clearness

what the main defence was, namely, that one or more of the

children other than those seen by Mrs. Fairburn, were either

playing in the nullah or accidentally fell in-4k into the

nullah while throwing stones. We consider that the Trial

Judge dealt sufficiently fully with the defence as to leave

no doubt in the minds of the Jury what the actual defence was

and that there was no misdirection on this point.

It was further alleged that the 'rial Judge misdirected

the Jury in his Summing Up by a reference to the bruises on

Mary Pine's neck as being a piece of direct evidence of

considerable importance from the point of view of circumstantial

evidence.

There was direct evidence that she had those bruises,

bruises which Counsel for the Crown had suggested in his opening

might have been caused by the Appellant seizing her by the

neck to throw her into the nullah.

There was no evidence that he did so, there was in fact

no evidence of how the bruises were inflicted. The learned

Trial Judge informed the Jury that they should fit this piece

of evidence into the jigsaw of pieces, but warned them to pay

no attention to the suggestion made by Counsel for the Crown

as to how she came by them, and stated that there was no evidence

to support that suggestion, he left them with no explanation

as to how she came by them. de could give none. de merely

stated that they were of considerable importance from the

point of view of circumstantial evidence and the Jury were

left to form their own conclusions as to how they were caused.

We consider that there was no misdirection here.