456
Was
|
|
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND following morning he cut the pillow @pen and that given on deposition before the Magis- searched it in presence of two other people.trate. He contended that there was substantial He did not find any bullet. On pulling the agreement between the story of Sheer Ali as pillow to pieces the hole appeared to be an inch told before that Court and as told by him on ⚫r two deep. The pillow was three or four previous occasions. With regard to the pre- inches deep. He was quite sure there was no sence of the Russian in the matshed at the time hole in the bottom of the pillow, so the bullet of the deceased's death, the evidence had shown could not have passed through it. He arrested that the prisoner did not attempt to blame the Russian for having fired the fatal shot, but the prisoner that night about eight o'clock ou the information of two or three men; one of the on the contrary he said that the culprits were two men dressed like Chinese soldiers. Prisoner men was Sheer Ali and another Hassan Safa, Prisoner was just going to bed, and witness said had stated also that when these men fired the to him. "I understand that you killed your fatal shot he was asleep on the same bed as brother." He told prisoner to put on his clothes the deceased, yet this was not borne out by the and come with him. Deceased, when he brought | evidence which showed that the bed-clothes the prisoner before witness and recommended were quite smooth and unrumpled. If the shot |
Wit had been fired from the direction of the door him for a job, decribed him as a brother.
by the robbers the bullet would have entered ness employed the prisoner on deceased's recom- mendation. One morning the deceased came in not the left side of the head, but the right
Having
through the gone
main and reported that he had found the prisoner side. asleep on duty and had fined him $1, putting the points in the evidence Mr. Pollock said in dollar on the table. Witness told him to take conclusion that the prosecution submitted that it back. Prisoner was fined twice. He could here they had a man, the prisoner, who had not say whether that was one week or two weeks a motive for committing the crime. They had that he might not unreasonably before the death of the deceased, but it was about shown
to have supposed
entertained sonie a fortnight. He did not think he had ever dis. ¦ be
the deceased. There missed any watchman on the recommendation of grudge against
also the fact that the deceased met his death the deceased; he dismissed some himself.
from the wound of a bullet such as might have come out of a revolver. There was the fact of the deceased giving an account of the affair which they could not accept. They had also the fact that era after the man's death the prisoner was stated to have used angry ex- pressions against the deceased at the grave. The prosecution had shown that the prisoner was guilty of this offence. Perhaps the jury might say that if they had only one or two facts of that sort to go upon they might consider that they were strong enough to convict upon, but when they had all these facts concurring and coming together. did it point to any other reasonable conclusion than that this man's hand was the hand that The Russian actually committed the crime? was there, but there did not seem to be the smallest ground for saying that the Russian did this. The prisoner had never attempted to put the crime upon him. him away, which was a thing that might be expected. seeing that the Russian had been discharged from the railway and that there would very likely have been trouble had he been found on the premises. Prisoner put forward a story which was improbable on the face of it. doubt a somewhat serious responsibility rested upon the jury in this case, but at the same time they had to ask themselves the question whether all these points he had mentioned did not bring the matter home to the prisoner in such a way as to make them prac- tically certain that his was the hand which shot circumstances All these the fatal bullet.
Cross-examined-To the best of his know- ledge, accused was in the employ of the railway at the time of Mahomed Jemal's death. He had given Jemal no authority to dismiss men. He could not say whether the second bed in the matshed had been occupied or not when he was called over on the morning of Jemal's death. The bed-cover was not pulled down, but it was He did it was not smooth. roughed-up; not say at the enquiry before the Vice-Consul that there was something like a man lying in this bed; that must have been taken down wrong. There was a Russian supposed to have been in that shed, but he did not know it at that time. The Russian told him he was there, when he returned that same night. He told witness he was in bed when the shot was fired: the shot wakened him up. and he saw a mun whom he did not know run out of the room, and. being scared, he covered his head up.
He
By a Juryman-When witness went over to the matshed first accused had all his clothes on apparently. When he came over to them he was dressed and had a lantern in his hand. understood from the Russian that he was in the bed adjoining deceased's bed when the shot was fired. He did not know whether the Russian had any fire-arms in his hand or not. Russian was brought back by his directions. When he heard the first shot and looked out he saw no light in the matshed; if there had been one inside he did not think he would have seen
The
it, but he would have seen one if it had been
outside.
By his Lordship-When the Russian was brought back he was put into the police quarters. close to where he stayed. He looked after him. The watchman was also there. The men slept The in the same place, but in different rooms. watchman remained there all the time, but the Russian got liberty to go about. They were there, he thought, about six days. He released them by orders of the engineer-in-chief. Prisoner had gone when the inquest was held. He did not go back to work on the railway after his release; witness would not let him do any thing more for him after what had happened.
C. A. Long, foreman on the railway, described how in the early morning of the 24th March he was wakened up by Mr. Ward, the previous witness, and went up to the matshed where the body of deceased was lying. Mr. Moore accom- His evidence panying then, and examined it. was substantially corroborative of that of the previous witnesses.
Other evidence was led. Hon. Mr. Pollock in addressing the jury contended that Sheer Ali, the principal witness for the Crown, had given his evidence in a very satisfactory manner and seemed a trustworthy witness. With reference to any slight varia- tions that might be pointed out in this witness's evidence as given at the trial and that which he gave on previous occasions on which he was examined in connection with the same case, Mr. Pollock quoted Queen r. Wainwright, 13 Cox. 171 (21st edition) as showing that little import ance must be attached to any such variations between the evidence given at the trial and
There was
no
He said he ordered
occurring together did show, it seemed to him. that the prisoner was the man who committed
the crime.
was
EL
case
Mr. Ellis in addressing the jury on behalf of of the prisoner, said this circumstantial evidence alone. Such evidence sometimes was the only evidence available, but it must be of a very strong character before a jury should convict. The principal witness was Sheer Ali, and he would ask the jury not to accept his evidence without careful sifting. He did not suggest that Sheer Ali deliberately committed perjury, but he suggested that it was possible he might have made mistakes which, though of a very trifling character, were of a very serious nature when they considered the evidence of the man as a whole. The jury would have to decide whether there was any evidence of any grudge or ill. feeling at all between the accused and the unfortunate deceased. He would point out the very important question which was put by Sheer Ali to the accused as to why he killed the deceased. They would notice that in one part Sheer Ali's statement of the answer was of a certain character, and in the second part of it it was actually an admission on the part of the accused that he did kill the deceased. The question of motive was a most damning factor, but there was no tittle of evidence to show that the deceased had given cause for any grudge or motive. As to the Russian, they could not decide why he went away, but they ought to give to everything which was brought forward in the case weight and consideration for or
[June 18, 1904.
With regard to the searching of the against it. pillow, as was alleged, surely it was not strange that the accused should do the same thing as the others had done where the man who had been killed was a man whom he called his brother? Unless the jury were satisfied that the evidence was clear, fair, and conclusive, they must discharge the accused man.
His Lordship, in charging the jury, said it was only natural that when this man died, the aconsed felt he ought to make a statement. With reference to what that statement was, the jury would have to decide upon the trust- worthiness of Sheer Ali's evidence and demea- nour in the box. The only. evidence that was corroborated, as to the accused's statement, was that of others than natives which, there was no concealing the fact, was more valuable With than uncorroborated native evidence. regard to the two soldiers mentioned by the accused, one of whom had a long gun, he put it to the jury that their existence was highly improbable; and it was impossible for a wound of the nature inflicted to have been inflicted by a long gun considering the position of the bed and the position of the deceased upon the bed. As to the Russian, there was no evidence that he had a revolver, and prisoner had never sng- gested that the Russian had committed this crime. It was to be regretted that the Russian had been allowed to go away. It was a sad thing that a British subject could be murdered within a short distance of a Consulate and no informa. tion be given of the circumstance. It was a pity that the Russian should have got away, but in their consideration of the guilt or innocence of the prisoner jurors were often confronted with the fact that a case had not been presented to them quite as satisfactorily as they could wish; and the fact that the Russian was not here was no reason why the jury should find the prisoner not guilty if they came to the conclusion that he was guilty on the evidence presented to them. After dealing with other points of the evidence, his Lordship went on to review that of Sheer Ali, saying that the only real discrepancy therein was his statement about the firing of the two shots himself at the matshed. If there was a reason needed why the prisoner should make the statement to Sheer Ali admitting his crime it might be found in the fact that the prisoner had been under arrest and afterwards "been liberated, so he would naturally consider that the matter was at an end. The whole evidence as to motive was that of Sheer Ali, but unless in that way was there any probable way of this man's death having been caused by the prisoner.
The jury retired to consider their verdict, and returned after an absence of about a quarter of an hour with a verdict of guilty.
The prisoner heard the verdict unmoved. His Lordship, having put on the black cap. said-Abdul Khalik, you have, after most careful and faithful enquiry, confirmed by a verdict in which I entirely concur, been found guilty of the murder of Mohamed Ali. The sentence of the Court is that you, Khalik, shall be taken from the place where you now stand to His Majesty's Consulate Prison at Canton, being the place in which you were last incarcerated; and on a day to be fixed by the proper authority you shall be taken-to the place of execution within the said prison there and hanged by the neck until you are dead; and your body shall be burned within the precincts of the said prison; and may God Almighty have mercy on your soul.
The Chief Justice was visibly affected as he pronounced the last words of the sentence.
The prisoner heard his doom with striking composure, and was understood to ask throu the interpreter when the sentence would be carried out.
His Lordship-The sentence I now pass will not be carried into execution here until I have reported this matter to His Majesty's Minister in Peking, and it will be for him to direct whether the sentence shall be carried into execution or not, or whether he will be pleased to commute the sentence for any other sentence, but I can hold out no hope to you that the sentence will be commuted, and I advise you to prepare for it being carried into execution.
The prisoner said that the people who had given evidence against him were his enemies.
His Lordship-Nothing that the prisoner can say now is of any use in this Court. If he
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.