District Councillor Acquitted of Assaulting Police Officer

Jocelyn Chau emerges from the court after cleared of assault charges

Hong Kong's Department of Justice may think it is doing its job, in the process of prosecuting over one thousand people who were involved in last year's anti-government protests, but its success rate is actually very low.

So far of the almost 9,000 people arrested, 5,700 are being investigated, about 1,500 are facing trial, and some 100 convicted so far.

Today is another case in point.

Co-defendant Lao Chak-yin was also acquitted

A Hong Kong district councillor who was charged with assaulting a policeman last year during the protests was acquitted today, after the magistrate ruled the involved officers and his superior had made up the incident, then "covered a lie with another lie".

Eastern district councillor Jocelyn Chau Hui-yan and co-defendant Lao Chak-kin, both 23, were charged with assaulting a policeman in North Point on the evening of August 11 last year.

In the trial it was heard that Chau and Lao were live streaming a gathering at King's Road at 9pm after an anti-government rally. It was there that they were accused of shoving Constable Hui King-yiu, causing him to strain his back.

But instead the footage taken by Chau showed Hui reaching for her mobile phone and telling her to stop filming, while Hui's colleague, Senior Sergeant Lam King-nin, accused the pair of making secret videos of them patrolling the area.

Chau last August 11 pinned to the ground by police

In addition, video clips that other journalists had taken at the scene showed Hui subduing Chau by kneeling on her back and forcefully pressing her against a wall.

In explaining his actions in court, Hui denied intercepting the pair over the filming, and said he did not mind being videotaped. He claimed he was simply trying to persuade Chau and Lao to leave the scene, fearing they might encounter a group of men, believed to be from Fujian, after hearing some of them curse the duo.

Lam backed up his subordinate's remarks, adding he had not seen the constable treating Chau roughly.

Eastern Court Magistrate Stanley Ho Chun-yiu said the officers involved had been dishonest.

"The two officers' testimonies are unreasonable and artificial. When they were cross-examined, they made up the facts and tried to cover a lie with another lie. They were not honest and reliable witnesses," he said.

Video screen shot of Constable Hui King-yiu that night

Ruling in favour of the defendants, Ho dismissed the officers' testimonies as "descriptions of a parallel universe", pointing to the footage played at the trial in which the two defendants and others visible appeared peaceful and non-aggressive.

"It is difficult to understand [the officers' testimonies]. There was no persuasion whatsoever. If the officers emphasized so much that they did not mind being filmed, then where did the criticism [of the filming] come from?" Ho said.

In addition, the magistrate found it unreasonable for the officers to focus on the two defendants rather than focus on dispersing the crowd.

"As police officers, shouldn't they stop these people who may cause a conflict, instead of intercepting some young people who have not done anything improper?" he asked.

Ho also criticized Constable Hui for using "absolutely unnecessary" force against Chau, before ordering prosecutors to bear the defendants' legal costs.

The magistrate says Hui used "absolutely unnecessary" force

Outside the court after the verdict, Chau said she and her lawyers would discuss the possibility of taking legal action against the constable, including launching private prosecution proceedings.

It's interesting the magistrate did not charge the two officers for perjury! One would expect anyone in a courtroom to speak the truth.
 It is outrageous that prosecutors wasted everyone's time and effort in presenting such a flimsy case when there was so much video footage that did not match with the officers' testimonies.

Did they think they could get away with making up what they did that night? It just shows their contempt for the law.

Thankfully the magistrate saw through it, and with the damning video footage, his verdict was clear-cut.