witness to testify against other defendants is not sufficient.” [Italics added.]
22. Of Jacky Ma’s knowledge of the range of discount to be afforded to those who were in the same circumstances in which he found himself, Mr Cheung invited the Court to note that Jacky Ma had stipulated a number of judgments of this Court, including one in which a discount of 50% had been afforded to a defendant who had pleaded guilty and testified against another defendant.
23. Mr Cheung invited the Court to note that in cross-examination Jacky Ma had testified that at the time that he agreed to be a witness against the applicant he was not aware that, in doing so, he could advance that fact in an appeal to seek a reduction in sentence.[1] On the other hand, Jacky Ma acknowledged that he was aware of that fact at the time of his testimony. Further, in cross-examination Jacky Ma had asserted that he had no idea what discount he could expect for giving evidence against the applicant.[2]
Billy Kay’s letters
24. Of the letters written by Billy Kay to various police officers, whilst the former was in custody with the Correctional Services Department, Mr Cheung submitted that they revealed a number of matters relevant to his credibility in the trial of the applicant. First, a desperation
