427
404.
680
681
uite possible and
had a completely separate rocket to the others. probable. He did not say to 20 that there was no station bergeant
Lau said he worked
he said he had came on behalf of CID of Shaukiwan. for a in Causeway Bay until he returned. He stopped in larch 1973. lla did return about that time and he went on long leave prior to retirement. wong brothers F.12 and Pw13. wong Tak Wing said that he introduced his brother to work for a Hak Shing in ley 1970. It seems strange that if a was already in retirement and had left because of his retirement he said he wanted to open off-course betting stall in forth Foint in 197although at that time he was at that time stationed in howloon City. During time he worked for la he said there was no change in his police posting. It could not be right
he worked for a for 6 months. Jong Chi Ving said he started assisting his brother in March 1973. working for a for about 6 months from Harch 1973 it working for him after ia had retired that
33 he
said
If P./12 was
seen, he was is in July 1972.
All these witnesses had in common was they had plenty of money about and wished they could leave as far as possible from ICAC another was they were granted immunity before they gave their evidence, except Lau Cheong wa, and they had of course all signed documents refusing to see solicitors.
hat chance has Defence got to see these people correspondence on 25, 1 ¥75 lir. ceats went to my firm saying that (aturday) arrangements had been made for the following Tuesday and W1 to F4 to attend offices of Operation Department.We know from Mr Chow in fact he only made arrangements for 2 to attend and 2 others he did not make arrangements but he vas confident they would attend. Confidence he slid they would attend
all founded. He has own mind whatever ICAC wanted thon to do to come along they would come he did not even have to tell then what it was for. That would only be consistent with the wording of the letter. Letter arrived on following week- day Monday and I wrote back to say Hamptonval Leaving Colony and 26th was not convenient to him. Completely
unilateral offer. un 28ta i set letter containing refusals of all
nepoel
P
wit-/ to see solicitors. Never had advantage of getting statements from witnesses although we quite reasonably asked to see them. Hr. Sceats has not given particulars and upheld by Court and Hammersley case bears a certain resemblance to this case. Lengthy particulars
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.