CONFIDENTIAL
the UK. The Attorney-General writes that he would not regard these grounds as genuine reasons for commutation. We must be careful not to interfere with the Governor's prerogative. But since we have been asked for our comments, it is fair for us to give them, while making it clear that we are not trying to usurp the Governor's function under the Letters Patent and Royal Instructions.
5.
The point is that the jury convicted only Lau of murder, while his co-accused was convicted of manslaughter. This must have
been because they believed that it was Lau who struck the fatal blow. But the crucial evidence of this was that of an accomplice who did not himself see the killing. The judge properly warned the jury of the danger of believing the evidence of an accomplice unless it is corroborated. There was corroboration, and although it was on a different point, it was enough in law to make the accomplice's evidence as a whole believable. But whatever the legal position, it would be dangerous to execute a man on the strength of an uncorroborated passage, in the evidence of an accomplice, who was anyway not present when the killing took place.
6.
I submit a draft telegram which I propose that we should send to the Governor. This makes the point that, even if he believes that the law must take its course in this case, we hope that he will not take any such decision, until Lord Goronwy-Roberts has had a chance to discuss the whole subject with him.
7.
The Department's legal adviser agrees. In accordance with our previous practice I have also consulted the Home Office experts whose duty it would be to advise the Home Secretary in any similar cases under British jurisdiction.
3 December 1974
сс
Mr Rushford Mr Champion
or
Asha
A C Stuart
Hong Kong & Indian Ocean Dept.
/Seeing
CONFIDENTIAL
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.