TNAG-0492-FCO40-557-Allegations-of-bribery-and-corruption-in-Hong-Kong-police-an-1974 — Page 104

་

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

London SW1

A Scrivener Esq 8 New Square Lincoln's Inn WC2A 3QP

Telephone 01-

Your reference

Our reference

Date

31 October 1974

254

Doar Scrivener

PF GODBER

LAST

REF.

NE

REF.

(265)

With reference to your talk with Stuart and myself on 29.October and your meeting with the Attorney General yesterday, I now attach a memorandum which Stuart and I prepared and which the Attorney revised in the light of his talk with you.

Please let me know if you have any comments on the memorandum. If it is acceptable to you, I will pass a copy back to the Attorney.

The memorandum will of course be treated as a confidential document as between ourselves, the Hong Kong Government and the Attorney.

The Attorney asked me to propose that if, contrary to your present expectations, you should find it necessary to act as in paragraph 2 of the memorandum, you should also tell French that the Attorney had been consulted as to whether it would be improper not to disclose Mrs Godber's affidavit at an earlier stage. The Attorney thought that as the affidavit was in the nature of a proof of evidence, it should not be passed to Prosecuting Counsel at that earlier stage, but that the source of the information (that is, Superintendent Irvine) should be disclosed at that stage.

Perhaps you would kindly confirm that this proposal is acceptable to you?

Yours smicusly

Antony Rushford

A R Rushford

Deputy Legal Adviser