TNAG-0552-FCO40-647-Allegations-of-corruption-and-bribery-in-Hong-Kong-police-an-1975 — Page 124

2. Hong Kong is a base for international Tin Sin Kuk swindlers, as exemplified by a case

of fraud in Singapore in which a Chinese millionaire was recently defrauded of Straits $3,000,000.00, involving 1 Chinese male and 2 Chinese females from Hong Kong who are now being sought by Interpol which has asked the Royal Hong Kong Police to locate the whereabouts of the swindlers concerned.

23. Upholding of the swindlers' appeal goes counter to public interest and will have far-

reaching repercussions in the years ahead, as follows-

a. future prosecutions of Tin Sin Kuk swindles in the courts of justice in Hong Kong are unlikely to succeed even if the cases for the Crown are proved, except, of course, where the defendants plead guilty to the charges;

b. illegal activities on the part of Tin Sin Kuk swindlers in Hong Kong have been

given a great stimulus;

c. victims to Tin Sin Kuk swindles have been discouraged from taking up their

cases with law enforcement agencies in Hong Kong;

d. public confidence in the judicature in Hong Kong will diminish;

e. the interests of Tin Sin Kukswindlers in Hong Kong have been best served by

the decision to uphold the convicted swindlers' appeal in that they do not have to go to jail even though the charges against them are substantiated; f. Tin Sin Kuk swindles in Hong Kong have been legalised, more or less, as a

result of the decision to uphold the appeal lodged by the convicted swindlers; g. Tin Sin Kuk swindlers have reportedly resumed their illegal activities which

had been brought to a standstill for more than half a year following arrest of the three swindlers in the above case and prosecution of their offences; h. corruption in public moral will be accelerated. 24. In the presence of law enforcement officers, the Petitioner did identify four(4) of the

swindlers concerned from an album entitled "Photographs of Known Tin Sin Kuk Swindlers in Hong Kong" compiled by the Royal Hong Kong Police and some other official records, as well as another one who had gone into hiding from the official records of the Registration of Persons Dept. on three separate occasions.

25. The defendants in the above case were also identified by three other victims to their

swindles within the precincts of the courts, including a respectable elderly Chinese lady named Mrs Lau who approached the Petitioner seeking his advice at noon on 4th April 1975 when he left the Victoria District Court after giving evidence during morning sessions of the hearing. (A photostat copy of a short note in the hand-writing of the aforesaid Mrs Lau containing her private telephone number is enclosed here- with for your inspection or the same will be supplied upon request.)

26. The decision to uphold the convicted swindlers' appeal has slapped the Crown, Judge Jones, Senior Police Superintendent J.P. MacMahon, as well as other ICAC and police officers who tackled the above case.

27. In upholding the convicted swindlers' appeal, the judicial officers on the bench

erred in not having weighed the facts of the above case as a whole on the strength of the evidence and exhibits before the court, against one single fallacious argument discreditting Senior Police Superintendent J.P. MacMahon while he was absent from Hong Kong on leave.

: 28.

The judicial officers on the bench did not hear the evidence of guilt against the convicted swindlers, nor did they see any of the Crown witnesses before their appeal was decided upon; probably they did not even examine all the evidence and exhibits upon which their convictions were originally based.

29.

If they had not been paid a very substantial sum of money or advantage, the defence counsels preparing the appeals on behalf of the convicted swindlers would not have conspired with judicial officers on the bench in upsetting the case for the Crown by foul means.

30. After he was swindled, the Petitioner had the opportunity, through the introduction ·

of a serving police detective, of meeting and talking to a Chinese male who was in charge of collecting "blind-eye" moneys from Tin Sin Kuk swindle rackets in Hong Kong on behalf of senior Chinese C.I.D. officers of the Royal Hong Kong Police Force, and obtained from him accurate information about the swindlers concerned as well as Tin Sin Kuk swindle rackets in Hong Kong generally. This man also told the Petitioner that he knew of the above case and that I was the victim even before the conspiracy on the part of the swindlers became known to the Petitioner. 31. After he was swindled, the Petitioner consulted, through an appointment made by

one of his schoolmates, solicitor

alias

), one of the defence counsels in court who suggested that he arranged a "fixing-up" with the swindlers concerned on behalf of the Petitioner, in return for rewards, through his schoolmate who was working in the Commercial Crime Office, Royal Hong Kong Police Force; the Petitioner did not take his advice. This incident was known to Judge Jones who smiled when he heard the evidence. Furthermore, in the morning of