In criminal trials, the principal items of evidence to prove the facts in issue are oral testimonies and documentary records including photos and audio-visuals. Facts can be formally admitted under s.65C of the Criminal Procedure Ord, Cap 221 as conclusive evidence. Their contents are treated as proven without further need to call the witnesses to testify them in the proceedings.
Even when a case is not ready for trial, the court, during the case's mention, often urges the prosecution and the defence to agree on as much as facts as possible under s.65C. The objective must be for actors of the criminal justice system to play their due roles in achieving efficiency in the dispensation of justice. The defence, however, might like to test the strength and weakness of the prosecution's evidence.
But when the court finds out, during pre-trial review, the few facts that have been agreed, the life of a defence solicitor would be difficult, if trial counsel's instruction is not to agree on anything. The end result I observe is that no one is pleased, as matters do not go as smoothly as they should because of different value assumptions. Anyhow, the court ensures there is procedural justice.
Comparing my prosecuting days then (mid-1980s) and now, I find that Judges were mostly expatriates, the language of the court was English and there were no audio-visual facilities. As to crimes and punishments, I find that they have been the same. I am pleased that I have specialized in intellectual property, empowering me to change the world at least in a very modest way!