THE estranged wife of a Cathay Pacific pilot who was accused of wounding her with a knife but was bound over to keep the peace when no evidence was offered against him has appealed to the Attorney-General to review the case. Ann Wilkinson yesterday sent a long and detailed letter to Jeremy Mathews stating that a miscarriage of justice had been committed and demanded to know who was responsible. Legislators Emily Lau Wai-hing and Selina Chow Liang Shuk-yee are backing Mrs Wilkinson's quest for justice and will raise the case in the Legislative Council in the near future. Mrs Wilkinson called on Mr Mathews to answer a series of questions on the case relating to why crucial facts were omitted from the hearing in Fanling Court on March 18, without her ''prior knowledge or consent''. She asked him to explain the discrepancies to clear ''a very dark cloud hanging over the reputation of the Hong Kong legal system'' and to explain the actions of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) who decided not to proceed with the case. Mr Ian Wilkinson was originally charged with wounding under the Offences Against the Person Act, which carried a maximum of three years in jail, but during the hearing the Crown sought only to have him bound over. ''At the last minute all the charges were dropped and were replaced with a bind over arrangement without my prior knowledge or consent. Why?'' Mrs Wilkinson said in the letter. Mrs Wilkinson states that the fact sheet read out in court ''was inaccurate, misleading and incomplete'', and implied the police agreed with the decision to drop the charges, which she said they did not. She also details what she states happened when she was attacked by her husband on December 31, 1992, at her house in the New Territories. ''It [the facts] stated blows were exchanged between my husband and myself. They were not,'' she said in the letter. ''It claimed the injuries I sustained were minor. They were not.'' She goes on to say her husband committed a ''prolonged and savage assault on me in that I was beaten in my own home, dragged at knife-point to a small room at the top of the house where I was subjected to further beatings and terrorised over a period of more than three hours before being strangled until I lost consciousness''. Mrs Wilkinson also informed the Attorney-General that a divorce court has already accepted her husband's role in the attack and as a result Mrs Wilkinson was granted a decree nisi in July 1993. She included her version of the incident in a divorce petition and said her husband admitted his role in the attack and that she received a ''letter of admission'' from his lawyers on January 12, 1993, which was given to the court. All of the evidence that was available then was provided for the hearing in Fanling in March but was not used. ''The prosecution was also informed that a further assault took place against me 10 days before the main assault on December 31, and that the police had to be called to my house again on April 19 to remove my husband and another Cathay Pacific manager who forced their way into my home and tried to intimidate me, refusing to leave until told to do so by the police.'' She asked the Attorney-General whether a mistake was made in November 1993 when the Legal Department decided to proceed with the wounding charge or was a mistake made later, when a decision was made not to proceed with the case. ''I fully understand the DPP has the right not to give explanations for his decisions but I believe that right to be a privilege conferred on the office, not the man, and I'm sure it was never intended to be abused by any individual for questionable motives as would appear to be the case here.'' Civil proceedings relating to Mrs Wilkinson's divorce are still underway and are unlikely to be finished until the summer.