Olympia Chambers Barrister James CC Cheng is a Useless Lawyer! 鄭從展大律師渣到死冇撚用!

Olympia Chambers Barrister James CC Cheng is a Useless Lawyer! 鄭從展大律師渣到死冇撚用!

https://hklawyers2021.blogspot.com/2021/12/olympia-chambers-barrister-james-cc.html

https://www.hkcnews.com/article/48746/咬甩耳朵-48768/

臨近審訊尾段，辯方大律師鄭從展欲在傳召最後一名證人、精神科專家前，呈上一份專家報告，惟報告內含其他不出庭作供的精神科醫生所撰寫的內容。法官張慧玲當時認為，辯方專家不能就「傳聞證供」作供，遂要求辯方修改報告。惟辯方經多次修訂，仍未達呈堂要求。張官感不滿，認為辯方呈上的報告不妥當，因當中透露了被告過去曾用雙刀架在妻子頸上，「控方都唔提暴力事件，你冇理由自己擺上嚟呀，好唔邏輯喎」。而被告較早時在庭上自辯時稱：「我從來沒有暴力，跟太太吵架都很少，基本上只是辯論。」張官續指，一直有留意鄭大律師的表現，發現其辯護多次與被告指示不符，又提及辯方數次更改抗辯基礎，「最初打自衛已經唔合理，之後又改口打精神有問題」。張官質疑被告的公平審訊權利是否受保障，一度提出更換律師或解散陪審團重審。張官更提到換大律師的法援安排，鄭大律師澄清自己並非法援律師，張官再斥責：「唔係法援，咁你更加唔妥啦。」

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Formal Complaint Against Barrister Sakinah Sat (薩忻琪大律師) of Des Voeux Chambers (DVC), 38/F, Gloucester Tower, The Landmark, Central, H.K.

Formal Complaint Against Barrister Sakinah Sat ( 薩忻琪大律師 ) of Des Voeux Chambers (DVC), 38/F, Gloucester Tower, The Landmark, Central, H.K. I am lodging a formal complaint, as a member of the public, against Hong Kong Barrister Ms Sakinah Sat ( 薩忻琪大律師 ) of Des Voeux Chambers (DVC), 38/F, Gloucester Tower, The Landmark, Central, H.K., for her blatant breach of  paragraphs 10.29 & 10.30 of the Bar Code , in that she has failed to act with candour and independence in the interests of justice, and  knowingly deceived or misled the Court , in her ex parte Court Application before David Lok J on 22 August 2020 (Saturday).   The material facts had been set out in  [2020] HKCFI 2288 (HCMP 1282/2020)  -  https://legalref. judiciary.hk/lrs/common/ search/search_result_detail_ frame.jsp?DIS=130716&QS=%2B& TP=JU  - where Linda Chan J said these about Hong Kong Barrister Ms Sakinah Sat ( 薩忻琪大律師 ) of Des Voeux Chambers: -   12.  Indeed, although the contemporaneous documents referred to i
Read more

Convicted Criminal Candy Fong (the Barrister) Lost Her Appeal - 已被定罪罪犯方也方大律師上訴失敗

Convicted Criminal Candy Fong (the Barrister) Lost Her Appeal - 已被定罪罪犯方也方大律師上訴失敗 HKSAR v. FONG E-FONG CANDY -  HCMA 108/2020 - ​[2020] HKCFI 3133 //The appellant was convicted after trial of one charge of Common Assault and fined HK$3,000.  The appellant appeals against her conviction.// //On appeal, the appellant made this court sit through repeated viewing of the CCTV footage alleging that she had been kicked.  I could not see that she was kicked.// //... my observation from having viewed the CCTV footage many times was that it can be seen from the footage that the appellant had intentionally grabbed hold of PW2 by putting her arm around the neck of PW2 in order to stop the wheelchair from moving and in order to get close to him in order to speak to him.  I therefore find that the conviction was neither unsafe nor unsatisfactory and therefore the appeal is dismissed.// https://legalref.judiciary.hk/ doc/judg/word/vetted/other/en/ 2020/HCMA000108_2020.doc 方也方被吊銷大律師執業資格 - Barrister Can
Read more

Barrister Candy Fong’s Misconduct Conviction - 方也方被吊銷大律師執業資格

方也方被吊銷大律師執業資格 - Barrister Candy Fong’s Misconduct Conviction https://www.gld.gov.hk/egazette/pdf/20081222/egn200812223579.pdf In accordance with section 37A of the Legal Practitioners Ordinance (Chapter 159), I hereby give notice that on 15 April 2008 a Barristers Disciplinary Tribunal found FONG E-fong, Candy (‘the Barrister’) guilty of 3 complaints of misconduct, namely:— (i) engaging in conduct which brought the profession of barristers into disrepute contrary to paragraph 6(b) of the Bar Code; (ii) engaging in conduct prejudicial to the proper administration of justice contrary to paragraph 6(b) of the Bar Code; (iii) acting without due courtesy to the Court. The Tribunal ordered, amongst others, that the Barrister be suspended from practising as a barrister for 9 months, 6 months and 3 months for the respective complaints, to run concurrently. The Tribunal also ordered that such period of suspension should commence after the appeal period, which appeal period was to run from 29 Ap
Read more