Like Tree21Likes

Ken Tsang Beating Case - Trial and Comments

Closed Thread
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    12,799
    Accused officers cast doubts on police CCTV - RTHK

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    3,988

    HK Police argue that HK Police CCTV is not authentic

    so HK police is arguing that HK police CCTV is not reliable? cannot be used as evidence in court ?

    those folks convicted by CCTV footage will be looking closely at this....

    Accused officers cast doubts on police CCTV - RTHK


  3. #33

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    薄扶林
    Posts
    47,971

    Scorched earth defence?

    At some point the prosecution will just have to approach the defence and promise them a deal before every case in the history of cases in HK is overturned due to the defence shenanigans.


  4. #34

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    734

    I found the fact they tried to argue that the news footage was faked already a bit far fetched, but this definitely is ridiculous. Would be very surprised if the judge were to agree that the CCTV footage is not authentic, so anyone with some trial experience who could perhaps enlighten us to why they even bother making these claims ?

    shri likes this.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Pampanga, Philippines
    Posts
    29,768
    Quote Originally Posted by henkka:
    I found the fact they tried to argue that the news footage was faked already a bit far fetched, but this definitely is ridiculous. Would be very surprised if the judge were to agree that the CCTV footage is not authentic, so anyone with some trial experience who could perhaps enlighten us to why they even bother making these claims ?
    Because they are paid a lot of money for the time spent making the claims. If I was paid megabucks to do it I would stand up in court and claim the moon is made of cheese. Who is paying the bill?
    JAherbert likes this.

  6. #36

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    734
    Quote Originally Posted by hullexile:
    Because they are paid a lot of money for the time spent making the claims. If I was paid megabucks to do it I would stand up in court and claim the moon is made of cheese. Who is paying the bill?
    You saying that the tax payer is footing the bill ? I would have assumed that the cops are not eligible for legal help as legal aid is means tested and police earn quite well.

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    734
    Original Post Deleted
    Well, there is a difference between them paying for the defence our of their own salaries or if its paid in e.g. legal aid.

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    15,557

    Do we need a new thread on this? Already been raised here:

    https://geoexpat.com/forum/342/thread329485.html


  10. #40

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,896
    Original Post Deleted
    What kind of logic is this? One is an expense rendered for services and the other is (possibly) paid due to them not properly carrying out these services. In the same manner, you can claim that taxpayers fund prostitution or drug dealers - fairly sure there will be at least a handful of Hong Kong's civil servants among their patrons.