TNAG-0486-FCO40-551-Review-of-death-sentence-in-Hong-Kong-1974 — Page 103

GR 400

IMMEDIATE

CONFIDENTIAL

CYPHER/CAT A

LABT

RGF.

NEXT

FM FCO 041200Z

REF.

2129

CONFIDENTIAL

TOP COPY

B 226

(HK)

TO IMMEDIATE HONG KONG TEL NO 135 OF 4 FEBRUARY.1974

DEATH SENTENCE: LIU CHU

1. MR BLAKER HAS ASKED WHETHER, ON ANY VIEW OF THE EVIDENCE, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN POSSIBLE TO JUSTIFY A FINDING OF MANSLAUGHTER, FOR EXAMPLE, ON THE GROUND OF SELF-DEFENCE WITH EXCESSIVE FORCE, AS

SUGGESTED BY THE JUDGE IN PAGES 87 AND 97 OF THE RECORD. IN THE EV- IDENCE OF WAN SANG KUEN (Pw9), HE SAID THAT HE SAW THE TWO MEN

FIGHTING, USING ARMS AND LEGS, ONE OF THE MEN FELL DOWN: HE DID NOT KNOW WHICH. THE OTHER WALKED AWAY FOR 7 OR 8 PACES, WHEREUPON THE FIRST MAN CHASED HIM AND CAUGHT HIM, AND THE FIGHT WAS RENEWED. THIS TIME ONE OF THE MEN WAS STABBING THE OTHER. HE DID NOT SAY WHE-

THER IT WAS THE ONE WHO HAD PREVIOUSLY FALLEN DOWN WHO WAS DOING THE STABBING, OR THE ONE WHO HAD WALKED AWAY.

2. IF IT WAS LIU CHU WHO FELL AND THEN CHASED THE RDECEASED (WHICH

ON THE WHOLE SEEMS UNLIKELY SINCE LUI WOULD PRESUMABLY HAVE WANTED" TO ESCAPE) THEN IT WAS CLEARLY MURDER WHEN LIU STABBED THE DECEASED. BUT IF, AS SEEMS MORE LIKELY, IT WAS THE DECEASED, AN OLDER MAN, WHO FELL (WAN SAID ON PAGE 43 THAT IT WAS THE WEAKER OF THE TWO), AND THEN CHASED AFTER LIU CHU IN CONTINUANCE OF HIS ATTEMPT TO ARREST HIM, THEN THE PICTURE COULD BE RATHER DIFFERENT. IT MIGHT BE ARGUED THAT LIU CHU HAD DONE HIS BEST TO FIGHT OFF THE DECEASED WITH ARMS AND LEGS: AND THAT WHEN HE HAD GOT RID OF HIS ATTACKER, HE HAD RESUMED HIS ATTEMPT TO ESCAPE: BUT THAT WHEN COR- NERED AGAIN HE WAS DRIVEN-IN DESPERATION TO USE A LETHAL WEAPON IN THE ATTEMPT TO DEFEND HIMSELF OR TO ESCAPE. HE OBVIOUSLY USED

EXCESSIVE FORCE IN DOING SO BECAUSE OF THE NATURE AND POSITION

OF THE DECEASED'S WOUNDS, AND THE FACT THAT WAN SAID THAT THE MAN WHO WAS BEING STABBED WAS LYING ON THE FLOOR, AND THE MAN WHO WAS DOING THE STABBING STANDING ABOVE HIM. HOWEVER ASSUMING THAT THE COMMISSIONER'S STATEMENT REFERRED TO ABOVE ACCURATELY REPRESENTS THE LAW IN HONG KONG, THEN IT SEEMS CONCEIVABLE THAT, IF THIS PARTICULAR ASPECT OF WAN'S EVIDENCE HAD BEEN EXPLAINED TO THE JURY (WE DO NOT KNO IF IT WAS COVERED IN COUNSEL'S FINAL

CONFIDENTIAL

/ADDRESS WHICH