Page:HKSAR v. Wun Shu Fai (CACC 48-2015).djvu/18

Rh 35. Senior Inspector Lee said that he had never received nor read the affirmation of Jacky Ma, dated 9 August 2012, which was filed with the Court in support of his application for leave to appeal against sentence, nor had he received or read the police notebook entries related to the visit of police officers to Jacky Ma and Billy Kay exhibited to Mr Cheung’s affidavit.

36. Of the contents of the letters written by Billy Kay, Senior Inspector Lee said that he expressed “…his personal feelings and/or concerns of his welfare in prison without mentioning D (the applicant).” Of the fact that none of the 12 letters were included in the List or Bundles of unused material served on the applicant on 24 October 2014, Senior Inspector Lee said “… these letters are not relevant or possibly relevant to any issue in the case against D. Items (2)-(13) were not included”.

37. Senior Inspector Lee said that he reached a similar conclusion to Chief Inspector Chan in respect of the Police Investigation Reports, namely that they were “… not relevant or possibly relevant to any issue in the case against D, as they did not contain any details but just the time of visiting the prisoners.” As a result, they were not disclosed prior to the trial.

38. In his second affirmation, Senior Inspector Lee adduced into evidence receipts signed by Jacky Ma and Billy Kay, dated 2 January 2015, acknowledging receipt of various documents from PC 5467, including: (Jacky Ma’s) non-prejudicial statements dated 7 March 2011 and 13 November 2014, a transcription of a video record of interview conducted of him on 22 December 2009, documents related to