Conspirators unlikely to record details in writing, judge tells jurors in Rafael Hui graft trial

Judge tells jurors it is unnecessary to identify any specific favours

Reading Time:2 minutes

(From left) Thomas Kwok, Raymond Kwok and Rafael Hui arrive at the High Court on Tuesday.

Published: 1:57pm, 8 Dec 2014Updated: 5:30pm, 9 Dec 2014

A lack of direct evidence showing a conspiracy to commit an offence is not rare in prosecutions as few criminals would put down such agreements in black and white, the presiding judge of the city’s highest-profile graft trial told the jury on Monday.

Beginning to sum up the case involving former chief secretary Rafael Hui Si-yan and Sun Hung Kai Properties’ co-chairmen Thomas Kwok Ping-kwong and his brother Raymond Kwok Ping-luen, Mr Justice Andrew Macrae said it was necessary for the nine jurors to consider whether there was a conspiracy, and whether the Kwoks were knowing conspirators, in a scheme for Hui to be or remain favourably disposed to the property magnates.

“[Only] in a rare case and an exceptional case would a jury receive direct evidence of a conspiracy,” Macrae said. “You expect them to do it in private – they won’t put it into writing.”

The Kwoks stand accused of bribing Hui to the tune of millions of dollars to be the “eyes and ears” in government for SHKP.

Macrae suggested that the jurors look at the behaviour of each of the five defendants, including SHKP executive director Thomas Chan Kui-yuen and former Hong Kong stock exchange official Francis Kwan Hung-sang, the alleged bagmen for the illicit payments.

Thomas Kwok, pictured, and his brother Raymond are accused of bribing Hui to be the “eyes and ears” in government for SHKP. Photo: Nora Tam