39
!
13
The matter was referred to Mr. R. E. Quine, then the Director of Criminal Investigation and Mr. C. D. St. Q. Fletcher, the Deputy Director of Criminal Investigation, and it was decided that Chief Inspector N. Rich of Interpol Bureau/Criminal Investigation Department should investigate this complaint. There was nothing significant in instructing Rich to undertake the investigations. He was chosen simply because he was sufficiently experienced and was relatively free at the time. Fletcher instructed him to establish the truth, if possible, and Rich's investigation was to be the basis of a possible criminal action or disciplinary action.8
14.
Rich interviewed Inspector MacLennan on 11 August 1978 and gave him a copy of Lau's statement made two days ago. MacLennan denied the allegations. He admitted the first meeting in Bennina's Restaurant where he was with Nawaz and Wilkinson. But he said that the encounter was very brief, that a Chinese youth came up of his own accord and stood by their table for a brief conversation, that he spoke English with a Scottish accent, that he wanted to join the Police Force and that MacLennan undertook to find out the necessary details. MacLennan went on to tell Rich that in the course of the next few days, MacLennan telephoned the Police Recruiting Office to find out the details of recruiting procedure for local applicants, that the Recruiting Officer advised that the minimum age for entry was 182 years and the applicant would be better off returning to the United Kingdom to complete his education and that MacLennan telephoned Lau and told him of the Recruiting Officer's advice. MacLennan said he could not even recall the youth's appearance. When asked why Lau should make such groundless allegation against him, MacLennan suggested that perhaps residents of Pat Heung Village were attempting to bring discredit upon police officers and Lau had been pressured into making the complaint.
15.
After the interview, Rich searched MacLennan's room in MacLennan's presence. He noted that all his underpants were of large size and white in colour. No incriminating articles and no coloured underpants were found.
10
16. Rich then interviewed and took statements from various other witnesses. Rich also interviewed Inspector Nawaz and Inspector Wilkinson who were present at the first meeting. Wilkinson confirmed that Lau had sat at their table and spoken with MacLennan.9 Nawaz recalled that Lau only stayed a few minutes and did not say if Lau stood or sat down.
The general and wash amahs at the Single Officers' Quarters could not identify the yellow underpants and neither had seen similar ones in MacLennan's room. The Recruiting Officer could not recall whether a European identifying himself as a police inspector had made enquiries about recruitment requirements on behalf of a Chinese youth. This is not surprising, as they received similar queries from time to time. The two Tsangs basically confirmed how they came to know about Lau's story and the substance of it as related to them.
17.
Rich interviewed Lau on 22 August 1978 and took a statement from him. This is substantially the same as his first statement apart from the more important inconsistency I have already referred to above. It is in much greater detail and it shows for the first time that some of Lau's friends, including Lau Wun-man, had some triad background. Lau admitted his association with these persons but denied that he was a Triad member himself.
18. Rich was unable to interview Lau Wun-man, the only witness who could confirm the second meeting in the Kaiser Restaurant. I find as a fact that Lau Wun-man knew the Police were looking for him but he was unwilling to provide any information. The Police stopped looking for Lau Wun-man after 4 September 1978.1
19.
11
On 9 September 1978, Rich completed his investigations and submitted a covering report. 12 He stated that although it was largely one person's word against another, there were a number of unusual aspects which pointed in a particular direction. The two unusual aspects he cited were:- (i) that it was not another malicious complaint: "particular attention was paid for any sign by Lau or by the Tsangs of a dislike of the Police or authority in general. No such sign was detected. They appeared reasonable persons and gave their statements in a sensible way without emphasizing the lurid aspect. It would of course have been easy for Lau, as he was making a serious complaint, to embellish the details, but he stuck scrupulously to his story in the face of close questioning during an interview lasting four hours." (ii) that from the particular rather than a general description of MacLennan's quarters, (e.g. where the wine was placed, the position of the air-conditioner and the type of large white underpants that MacLennan wore), Rich thought there seemed no doubt that Lau had been there. In his conclusion, Rich set out a number of possibilities. He came down in favour of the possibility that the complaint was a true bill and he gave his reasons as follows: "MacLennan's explanation that the complaint has been laid at the instigation of Pat Heung residents wishing to denigrate the police force is plausible as regards a possible motive but does not explain away the substantial body of detail which David Lau has produced. Lau's education depends on grants from a UK education authority--he must realize that trouble with the police here might jeopardize his standing with the authorities in UK not to mention the disgrace which would befall his relatives. Lau's personality appears to be such that he would not risk everything for such a paltry motive. In addition, his testimony has the ring of truth." I am in full agreement with Rich's analysis and conclusion.
Statement of R. M. Wilkinson dated 15 August 1979, File I page 45.
8
Transcript page 8888.
9
10
11
File I page 38.
12
File I.
Statement of Rab Nawaz dated 4 September 1978, File I page 44.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.