205
Inqa and had no power to do so. There would be nothing to be gained by re-opening the Inquest. The Attorney General was careful to say that he was not prepared to comment on why the jury reached the verdict, nor would it be proper for him to do so. At the press conference, the Attorney General had with him photographs (some of which were reproduced in the press) and all the statements including those which were excluded by the Coroner.
18.
The Attorney General's press conference, however, did not quell the public debate, dealing as it did, with only one aspect of the case, namely, the cause of death. On 16 May 1980, the South China Morning Post, in a leader, said:-
"To leave the matter as it now stands is highly unsatisfactory. There can be little doubt that John MacLennan shot himself but the factors that led to his death have not been in any way adequately explained."
The next day, the Hong Kong Standard in a leader expressed the view that:
19.
"this (verdict) has cast some grave suspicions over the Police Investigations in Mr. MacLennan's death. A re-trial of the case was, therefore, essential, not only to determine the cause of the death but also to ensure that the Police had discharged their responsibilities impartially as they should in investigating the case."
1 June 1980 saw the first of a number of developments which brought the controversy surrounding the death of MacLennan into yet starker relief. On this day, Mr. Tony Panell, the foreman of the jurors empanelled for the Inquest, wrote an open letter to South China Morning Post expressing his great concern over some of the statements made by the Attorney General and saying that he could not permit statements made by the Attorney General at his recent press conference to stand unchallenged.
20.
Panell challenged the Attorney General on six points, namely:
(a) that there were four locks or chains on the door to the dead policeman's flat and door could be broken down to allow the
police to enter.
Panell said that the locked door did not prove suicide, particularly when the external windows had not been checked.
(b) the window of the bedroom of MacLennan's fourth floor flat was locked from the inside.
Panell said, “This is an absolutely false statement. The first person to inspect the window (only one window was discussed but there were two of the same size) was Chief Inspector Kong who arrived at 12.10 p.m. . . . He looked at the window about 30 minutes after arrival and gave evidence that the window was closed, not locked, even though Mr. Downey, Counsel for MacLennan's parents, specifically asked if the windows were locked."
(c) MacLennan had requested an alarm telephone call to be made at 5.30 a.m. on the day that he died.
Penall said, "Expert witness confirmed that 11⁄2 pints of beer would have no effect on a man's faculties particularly a man of MacLennan's size. Therefore, MacLennan's drowsy answer to the wake up caller was sleepiness and not effects of alcohol. A distressed man contemplating suicide is not likely, in my opinion, to have a good night's rest before dying. But it is possible."
(d) He had drawn a police revolver from an armoury at 6 a.m. He lied to the armourer who knew him that he was going on a
raid.
Panell said, "The reason the SIU planned to arrest MacLennan secretly was for fear that if he knew he was to be arrested, he may destroy evidence or arm himself. He was, unfortunately, told of the impending SIU interview and did just what they were hoping to avoid. He armed himself, possibly to protect himself, but in Mr. Griffith's opinion, to commit suicide.”
(e) He had died between 6.10 a.m. and 6.40 a.m. and two of the bullets that killed him had been fired from the weapon he had
drawn and signed for.
Panell said, "This conclusively proves that the said gun was the death weapon but does not prove that MacLennan had committed suicide. If he did, it was the first time in recorded forensic history that a person inflicted multiple death wounds on himself with such a gun. The examples that Mr. Griffiths cited as precedents for multiple self-inflicted wounds were from gun of much smaller calibre. There were none of MacLennan's fingerprints on the gun."
(f) There was clear evidence from a handwriting expert that the suicide note in the locked flat had been written by the dead
Inspector.
Panell said, "I assume when Mr. Griffiths says locked flat, he is only referring to the doors, because the windows were not proven by evidence to be locked. They were closed." Panell also said, "Mr. Griffiths' statement aside, this was the only real evidence the jury was presented with that could possibly indicate suicide. In the case of an ordinary citizen leaving such a note, the benefit of doubt might lean towards calling it a suicide note. However, in the case of a detective, who by the very nature of his work, is constantly in contact with the criminal element, another aspect which would raise its ugly head is the possibility that the note could have been written under pressure, even at gun point."
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.