TNAG-0814-FCO40-1020-Representation-of-Christopher-Clements-facing-murder-charge--1978 — Page 5

•

Page

(3)

- 3 -

this fall, also scratches on his person as later viewed by the doctor were inflicted during this mugging. That he sustained hurt to his right wrist or hand when he fell. There were conflicts of evidence between he, the doctor and the laundryman as to whether his watch had been stolen. These were minor but perhaps of significance to the jury.

Clements explained the blood on his shoe as possibly arising when he interceded in a fight which occurred on board the s.s. Acadia at Manila between Goanese Seamen.

(4)

The question of head hair and blood matching his found at the scene was explained by being co-incidence.

(5)

5.

Clements acknowledged during cross-examination that he been treated fairly by members of R.H.K.p.

Clements' father was called in support of some minor peripheral matters and also as to character. Seven statements were admitted in evidence at the request of defence, the Crown not raising any objection. All these attested to previous good character something which was never in issue as far as the Crown was concerned.

6.

The Judge in summing up clearly left manslaughter on the basis of provocation as an alternative to murder, assuming first that the jury were satisfied as to the identity of the killer. In fact the Crown likewise raised as a possibility the concept of manslaughter if the jury were satisfied identity was established. The jury obviously rejected manslaughter and indeed there was clear evidence from the pathologist that some eleven blows had been struck on the person of the deceased, some of considerable severity. There was sufficient evidence for the jury to hold that there was an intention to cause grevious bodily harm constituting sufficient intent for the offence of murder. The important fingerprint and hair evidence was given by Hong Kong experts and the evidence as to cross matching of blood was given by Mr. Culliford of the Metropolitan Forensic Police Laboratory London, an acknowledged expert in this field.

7.

We are awaiting a date for hearing of the appeal from the court and will notify you later.

BPC:fl

Yours faithfully,

Brian & Downy

(B.P. Clancy)

Ag. Assistant to the Law Officers

P.S.

Since writing the above, I have been informed that the hearing date for Appeal has been fixed for 19th May.