XN000022-1984-08-02 — Page 13

THURSDAY, AUGUST 2, 1984

12

RESPONSIBLE PERSON COULD NOT BE IDENTIFIED

****

DESPITE THOROUGH ENQUIRIES, THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CMB BUS ACCIDENT IN HAPPY VALLEY COULD NOT BE IDENTIFIED, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, THE HON MICHAEL THOMAS SAID IN THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL TODAY.

MR THOMAS WAS REPLYING TO A QUESTION BY THE HON MARIA TAM AS TO WHY THERE HAD BEEN NO PROSECUTION IN THE CASE WHICH RESULTED IN A CORONER'S VERDICT OF MANSLAUGHTER.

MR THOMAS SAID THAT THE DIFFICULTY IN THIS CASE STEMMED FROM THE FACT THAT THE CORONER'S VERDICT WAS + INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER BY A PERSON OR PERSONS UNKNOWN, BUT WITHIN THE CHINA MOTOR BUS CO. LTD+.

+AFTER AN INQUEST LASTING SEVEN DAYS IN WHICH EVIDENCE WAS GIVEN BY ABOUT 30 WITNESSES, THE JURY STILL COULD NOT SAY WHO IT WAS THAT WAS CRIMINALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACCIDENT, HE SAID.

IT WAS CLEAR ENOUGH THAT A WRONG SIZED BOLT, SLIGHTLY SMALLER THAN IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN, FAILED TO RESTRAIN A MOVING ANCHOR PIN, AS IT SHOULD HAVE DONE AND THE DIRECT RESULT WAS THAT THE NEAR SIDE FRONT WHEEL JAMMED, CAUSING THE BUS TO VEER SUDDENLY AND UNCONTROLLABLY TO THE LEFT ONTO THE PAVEMENT, + MR THOMAS SAID.

BUT AS THE EVIDENCE SHOWED, THE BOLT COULD HAVE BEEN FITTED AT ANY TIME IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS OR LONGER BY ANY ONE OF A LARGE NUMBER OF MECHANICS AND FITTERS EMPLOYED BY CMB, HE SAID.

+ IF THE CULPRIT COULD BE IDENTIFIED AND HIS RECKLESSNESS ESTABLISHED. IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE TO BRING THE CHARGE OF MANSLAUGHTER AGAINST THAT PERSON.

+BUT DESPITE THE THOROUGH ENQUIRIES BY THE ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION UNIT BEFORE THE INQUEST, AND OTHER ENQUIRIES MADE BY THE POLICE, THE RESPONSIBLE PERSON CANNOT BE IDENTIFIED, MR THOMAS SAID.

NOR WAS THERE ANY EVIDENCE THAT ANY OF THE SENIOR EMPLOYEES OR DIRECTORS OF THE CMB HAD BEEN PERSONALLY INVOLVED. CHARGES OF MANSLAUGHTER COULD ONLY BE BROUGHT AGAINST A COMPANY OR ITS DIRECTORS OR MANAGERS IF THERE WAS EVIDENCE OF RECKLESSNESS ON THE IR PART.

+SO FAR, THE INVESTIGATIONS WHICH HAVE BEEN PURSUED AS FAR AS THEY CAN, HAVE REVEALED NOTHING TO JUSTIFY SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS BEING MADE AGAINST THEM, + MR THOMAS SAID.

HE SAID HE WAS WELL AWARE OF THE SENSE OF GRIEVANCE OF THE DISTRESSED RELATIVES AND THOSE WHO WERE ARTICULATING A CRY FOR JUSTICE. BUT IT WOULD NOT BE JUST TO BRING CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST SOMEONE WITHOUT EVIDENCE OF LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY MERELY TO SATISFY A CALL FOR A SCAPEGOAT.

/+IT IS