A Hong Kong police officer calmly faced a barrage of questions from the director of Public Prosecution in court about his part of the investigation on last Monday and insisted that all of his investigations was about finding the truth.

The officer is a member of the Hong Kong Kowloon East Regional Crime Unit, who is responsible for investigating the second defendant in the case, YIM Yu-hang.

Hong Kong prosecutors questioned that some of his investigations violated the unit’s investigation rules and principles, which may further have an impact on the defendant’s confession and judgment results.

The prosecutor said that when the police officer had sufficient evidence to charge the second defendant, instead of informing the person that he may be prosecuted for the event without delay, which is one of the essential principles of investigation, the officer still tried to get much more information from the defendant, asking further questions.

Facing this question,the police officer explained he thought his investigation was not over yet, and he was not aware of the charging decision of the second defendant, as it was made by someone else.

CCTV footage also showed that during the face-to-face investigation, the police officer and his partner both once left the room halfway,to report the content of the investigation to their director. The police officer admitted he provided the phone number of the first defendant, CHOW Ching-yin, to the director at that point, which the prosecutor believed was likely to be a leak of defendants’ confession.

Moreover, the prosecutor found the police officer wanted to get “as much as possible” information about other defendants from the second defendant and tell other investigators what the second defendant say about other suspects. “It is almost a team tactic when they interview all those suspects.” The prosecutor added.

But the police officer insisted that the whole investigation he did was to find the truth of the case. “Some questions should be put when they are necessary for preventing or minimizing the harm or loss to some other persons.” The police officer said in court.

When the prosecutor asked if there is an exchange of information and development of points from interview to interview before the suspects are fined, the police officer answered, “If the exchange is beneficial to the case, then we will do it.”

The prosecutor disagreed. “Suspects have the habit of blaming everyone but themselves, you want them to tell the truth, but they will lie.” He thought this kind of exchange would undermine the independence and integrity of the confession.

The case was a murder in 2017. The victim Bosco was invited to climb the mountain and take part in the evening wargame at the hilltop. His scarred body was later found at the foot of the mountain,and his three fellow travelers were arrested,including the second defendant, Yim Yu-hang. This is the voir dire of the case.

%d bloggers like this: