arrest, also referred to Lau's having rightly denied allegations made by the defence which had been in no way supported, and this was reiterated by the Court of Appeal.
17.
It is impossible to say with the certainty that I consider necessary that the Court of Appeal would still dismiss the appeal in the face of Lau's convictions for conspiracy and perjury.
12.
At the same time, there was a good deal of other evidence before that Court, independent of Lau, on which the Court of Appeal could nevertheless dismiss an appeal.
are
13. Whether any credibility at all now remains as regards Lau's evidence and whether the other evidence is sufficient by itself to sustain the convictions of Cunninghan and Thompson eminently matters for a court to decide. For this reason, I advise that the cases of both Cunningham and Thompson should be referred to the Court of Appeal under section 83P of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance for the Court to consider whether or not the findings of the Commission of Inquiry regarding Lau and his subsequent conviction for conspiracy to defeat the course of public justice and for perjury committed in the Inquiry itself and in the Cunningham and Thompson trial make the convictions of conspiracy of Cunningham and Thompson, or either of them, unsafe and unsatis- tory. If you refer the case to the Court of Appeal, it is my intention to argue strongly that their convictions should still stand.
14.
Does Y.E. refer, as above?
(J.4.D. Hobley) Attorney General
25.2.77
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.