valid reason for doubting any police reports, but the ones I saw had nothing in them to indicate they were police reports). The Attorney-General and his. officer in no way contradicted me when I said I trusted the latter's reports. Neither of them ment- ioned that he had in fact never interviewed any witnesses and the information had como from the SIU whom I knew to be targeting MacLennan. But this came out later, and at that time I was kept in the dark.
The statements I saw were short, about one half to two-thirds of a sheet in length. There were eight reports, each naming the accuser,
his age,
where John Pazhannan had picked him up (invariably at a bar), how he had taken him to his quart- ers at Homantin, some details of what happened there, and the amount he was paid by MacLennan for his services, The statements differed little, except in the names,
ges and amounts paid. I noticed that all the names were Chinese, ages varied in the twenty and thirty age group except one, who was nineteen, and that only two amounts, $50 and $100 were mentioned. I wondered why the price varied since the action was identical. I noted that all except one was about John's age. I also noted that they were all standing around obviously looking for a patron and went willingly to the
Bomantin flat..
The query I immediately raised with the Attorney-General was, why these statements all seemed to have been written by one person, with almost identical wording, yet all were in the first person. He considered that as the same thing occurred in each case, the stories were likely to coincide. I remarked that they. were all consenting, and all but one were adults. I told the Attorney-General that I feared this kind of person was a triad member because I knew that one cannot by a prostituté, male or female, without coming under triad control somewhere along the line, The Attorney-Ceneral agreed that they could be triads. Questioned winy these men were not being charged along with John, the Attorney-General said that they were exempt because they had agreed to be witness in another case. It was the old story professional or forced witnesses to froze the target.
*
The actions themselves as described in the statements were repulsive to mo, but I pondered the whole affair as I returned home. Then I sat down and wrote to the Attorney-General, pointing out my doubts, especially that it would be eas For a triad gang to give evidence like that to destroy any policeman. John had mentioned at our 1978 meeting that he was not popular with triads because of his fearless action on crime.. I reminded the Attorney-General of the alleged attempted
incitement to crime" by the SIU reported to me by the Senior Inspector, who, I feared; would now be in danger if he spoke up. The contents of these statements were vivid in my mind, and it is therefore quite impossible to have made a mistake when lator, at the MacLennan Inquiry, I was asked to admit that the statements shown were lengthy ones each of several pages long written on police-headed paper. But more of that later.
The Attorney-General had assured me in my interview on 24th January that he would hold a thordugh inquiry into the affair. I had no reason to doubt him. In fact, I felt reassured to know that this would not be a case of police investigat- ing police. On 14th February I visited the lawyer incarcerated for homosexual pract- ices and mentioned among other things, that thought the Attorney-General was a decent
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.