TNAG-0074-FCO40-110-Dismissal-from-police-force-petition-from-Chu-Leung-1968 — Page 43

0003170

G.F. 317

A.

Q.

TOP SECRET

34

In my opinion the only reasons I can give are (1) they are using me to cheat their superiors for financial gain, (2) to use my name to protect their own genuine source in Special

Branch.

In your opinion did the 4 principal witnesses give their evidence in a straightforward and honest manner?

A.

I do not think so.

CHU Leung

8th January, 1962

HAU King To

8th January,

1962.

N.G. ROLPH, ACP/K

8th January, 1962.

S/Sgt. CHU Leung has no witnesses to call in his defence.

N.G. ROLPH, ACP/K

8th January, 1962.

Proceedings closed at 1620 hours, 8th January, 1962.

HAU King To

8th January, 1962.

N.G. ROLPH, ACP/K

8th January, 1962.

Proceedings re-opened at 1430 hours, 11th January, 1962. ACP/K said that he was going to amend certain charges as follows: 1. Charge (B) 1. in line 4, change "four" to "two" and delete

and (4) YAM Sai Ping" in the penultimate

"(3)

line.

Read amended charges to accused, understands, 2. Charge (D) 1, delete "(3)

Mglade

P.N.G.

and (4) YAM Sai

Ping"

J

Read amended charge to accused, understands, P.N.G. 3. S/Sgt. CHU Leung does not wish any adjournment.

HAU King To 11th January, 1962

N.G. ROLPH, ACP/K

11th January, 1962.

ACP/K recalled the witness

Witness

i.e. the 7th Prosecution

Have you ever seen these documents before? (Witness shown the

/35.....

TOP SECRET