TNAG-1101-FCO40-1351-Legislation-on-homosexuality-in-Hong-Kong-including--Report--1981 — Page 100

108

99.

In his evidence at the Inquest and at this Inquiry, Edgley gave the clear and certain opinion that theged suicide note was in MacLennan's hand. He was also of the same view as regards the two signature at the fourth and ninth columns of the Beat Equipment Register and the time as recorded in the third column of the same register. Edgley had given expert opinion on handwriting on many occasions in the Courts in Hong Kong and his opinions have been accepted on every occasion. I have no cause to doubt his expertise. However, in view of the public disquiet over the death of MacLennan, I thought it necessary to obtain the opinion of an expert in the field who is totally unconnected with Hong Kong. On 28 August 1980, the Commission's Secretary, Mr. Norman Chan, was able to instruct Mr. Davis, through a London firm of solicitors, Messrs. Charles Russell & Co. On 8 September 1980, Davis forwarded a detailed report, containing a most meticulous analysis of the two Exhibits which were submitted to him for consideration. Although he also concluded that the alleged suicide note was in MacLennan's handwriting and that MacLennan did write part of the entries in the Beat Equipment Register, I decided to call him to give oral evidence, which he did.

100.

101.

Mr. Davis' evidence was not challenged in any way. It covered the following aspects:-

(i) The basis upon which handwriting could be recognized, and the general approach he took to examine the

Commission Exhibits submitted to him;

(ii) His detailed examination of the alleged suicide note, in particular whether it could have been written under

duress;

(iii) His examination of the Beat Equipment Register;

(iv) His conclusion.

In a lucid exposition of his opinion, illustrated by blown-up photographs which he had taken and transferred to thermo-prints and projected onto a screen for the convenience of the Commission, Davis explained that he approached the examination of the documents submitted to him on the premise that they were forgeries. He explained the many ways by which a forgery may be detected and subjected the alleged “suicide note" and the Beat Equipment Register to every conceivable test he could devise. One of the tests he conducted was to first form an opinion that all the documents that he had for the purposes of comparison by virtue of their common habits, tendency and formation, were of common authorship, namely, that of MacLennan's. Then he proceeded to use these common traits and tested these traits against the handwriting on that note and the Beat Equipment Register. In each case, the Exhibit passed the test, indicating that it could not have been a forged document. In the end, he concluded that he was "in no doubt that the writer of the letter dated 2 January 1980 (this is the letter from MacLennan to his parents) also wrote the alleged suicide note dated 15 January 1980 (Exhibit No. B1)."

102. Davis then considered how the suicide note was written. Based on information supplied by MacLennan's parents, through Messrs. Charles Russell & Co., he came to know that MacLennan was right-handed. He was of the opinion that MacLennan wrote the date and its underscore in a standing position, the rest having been written in a sitting position. In addition, he was of the opinion that the signature was MacLennan's and he demonstrated this convincingly by one of his thermo-prints blown-up (see Plate 27).

103.

He further considered whether the handwriting on the suicide note exhibited the usual signs of duress, and he found none. In this process, he had considered and excluded the possibility that MacLennan had been under the influence of alcohol, having been told that on autopsy only a minimal amount of alcohol was found in MacLennan's blood-stream.

104. As to the Beat Equipment Register, he gave the opinion that MacLennan did in fact sign on part of that register, namely, on the fourth and ninth columns in the following manner:--

"TO WHOM

ISSUING/RECOMMENDING OFFICERS

105.

INP Maclennan

D. I. Maclennan"

Mr. Davis' evidence was detailed, professional and convincing. I am left with no doubt whatsoever that the alleged "suicide note" and that part of the Beat Equipment Register, as indicated by Davis, were in MacLennan's hand. His full report is at Appendix 25.

(a) Forensic Pathology

(I) Post-Mortem Report

106.

The post-mortem was conducted by Dr. Wong. Dr. Wong at that time had only about 20 months' experience in forensic pathology, prior to which he was a houseman in obstetrics and gynaecology for a year. The quality of his post-mortem report was, however, clear and competent. This was the unanimous view of all the forensic pathologists, of much greater experience, who were called to give evidence at the Inquest and before this Commission.

1

-DO L

1

tl

b

I

3(

15