2019年3月27日星期三

On the sauce 飲大咗

這一篇講英文, 雖然我英文差, 臉皮厚來一次標少英語教室。先看時事摘要, 來自news.com.au的報導:

The two One Nation officials caught up in an undercover investigation say they had “got on the sauce” when they were recorded talking about soliciting millions of dollars in foreign donations from the American gun lobby.

...

Mr Ashby called the sting “a deliberate set-up by the Qatari government”.

“He set these meetings up. This is skulduggery at its worst. This is the very first time Australia has witnessed political interference from a foreign government.”


On the sauce在這裏是指飲醉了, skulduggery 即是卑鄙無恥。

One Nation是澳洲鼓吹白人主義的右派政黨, 我在低端議員那篇約略提過。One Nation這兩天爆紅, 事緣是澳洲記者Muller夥同中東的報紙Al Jazeera(半島媒體集團)向One Nation放蛇, 由Muller扮作熱愛槍械的組織主持人, 恰恰相反的是Muller實際上是主張管制使用槍械的。整個放蛇行動經歷3年, Muller穿針引線, 介紹美國National Rifle Association的人給One Nation認識, 一方想銷售軍火, 另一方想招募捐獻, 過程被Muller偷拍了。One Nation要求的黑金是一、二千萬澳元。昨天Muller把這事捅出來, 外國勢力試圖影響國會議員放寬槍械管制的法例。若果是中國商人涉事. 大概會罵到拆天, 美國大佬嘛, 自然會淡化了。One Nation這幾個頭頭, 說自己當時got on the sauce, 飲大咗喎, 然後還要諉過於他人設局, 罵人卑鄙無恥。Muller作為agent provocateur, 我們可以道德批判他, 但他卻把這些狗黨的一言一行偷錄下來, 醜態畢露而狗急跳牆的One Nation, 惡人先告狀, 竟可以罵別人卑鄙無恥, 這世道, 甚麼都可以扭曲, 佩服之致。

50 則留言:

  1. https://news.mingpao.com/ins/%e6%b8%af%e8%81%9e/article/20190326/s00001/1553580380529/%e8%ad%a6%e9%a6%99%e6%b8%af%e4%bb%94%e5%8f%8d%e7%88%86%e7%ab%8a-%e5%85%a9%e5%85%a7%e5%9c%b0%e7%94%b7%e6%b6%89%e9%81%8a%e8%95%a9%e8%a2%ab%e6%8d%95

    如果去豪宅區散步,無爆竊工具,算唔算遊蕩?

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 不是散步, 是loiter with intent to commit an arrestable offence, 譬如爆竊, 是否足以構成遊蕩, 視乎警察觀察他們怎樣可疑。如有爆竊工具, 就是going equipped的控罪了。

      刪除
  2. 標少的【若果是中國商人涉事. 大概會罵到拆天, 美國大佬嘛, 自然會淡化了】,

    好巧笑!俾个贊!

    jack

    回覆刪除
  3. 咪同呢D人一樣囉:
    http://hd.stheadline.com/news/realtime/hk/1466701/

    "控方下午播放許智峯事後在立法會的記招片段,以及許在去年5月5日的會面錄影片段。惟期間許在庭上使用手提電話,遭裁判官批評並一度休庭5分鐘。然而辯方大律師亦表明,許身為議員,其實一直用文字方式處理公務及相關事情;再者,裁判官亦未有任何撤回電子通訊模式的命令,法庭亦設有wifi,公眾人士亦可在不干擾法庭運作下使用電子設備。聆訊遂繼續進行。"

    如果係內地人在庭內用電話,肯定又嘈到拆天.....

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. OMG, even a magistrate is out of touch with current court practice (on wifi etc.). No wonder i saw someone was told by a security officer not to use his mobile phone typing even before court convened. This was not a single incident of the court's malpractice...

      PHLI

      刪除
    2. Agreed, PHLI. Some magistrates (and court clerks) think they have supreme power and may impose whatever trivial restrictions they like, against drinking water, taking notes or using ball pen instead of sign pen to cross out words. See e.g. below a partially substantiated complaint against a DSM:

      "The complainant took notes for study purpose at a court proceeding but the Deputy Special Magistrate told the complainant that the complainant must obtain leave from the court before the complainant could do so. The complainant refused to apply for leave, left the court and made this
      complaint. The Court Leader subsequently advised the Deputy Special Magistrate that there was no need for persons observing the proceedings to obtain leave to take notes. However, if the court had suspicion that the notes would be used in some manner that might affect the integrity of the hearing, the court had an inherent jurisdiction to stop it. This complaint arose out of a misunderstanding on the part of the Deputy Special Magistrate."

      (Footnote 23(a), https://www.legco.gov.hk/yr15-16/english/panels/ajls/papers/ajls20160321cb4-717-3-e.pdf)

      刪除
    3. Thanks. I don't quite grasp the court practice now.

      刪除
  4. 我咁睇,正苦放蛇捉嫖客/馬伕,都唔可以主動拉客,免招惹人犯罪之嫌
    http://orientaldaily.on.cc/cnt/news/20090514/00176_047.html

    依家記者主動問人收唔收黑金,道德上亦唔好得去邊!

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 這些政黨, 娼妓也不如。記者只是穿針引線, 讓他們自暴其醜。

      刪除
  5. https://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20190328/bkn-20190328101354672-0328_00822_001.html
    為何謀殺罪安排在東區法院審理, 而不是在高等法院?

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 一步一步來, 所有刑事都先上裁判法院。

      刪除
  6. 前工程師学会会長非法泳池案。

    甘辯护,真垃圾。有專业,可以不守法了。

    jack
    引用

    辯方陳詞則指,劉(辩护專家)和屋宇署的資深
    結構工程師,均指水池不會令樓板超載,而屋宇署考慮本案時,應處理個别情況,而非考慮水池重量
    對不同處所樓板的影響。辯方指被告是資深工
    程師,品格良好,憑計算已知水池不會對結構造
    成影響,毋須事先申請。

    https://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20190328/mobile/bkn-20190328161839153-0328_00822_001.html

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. "憑計算已知水池不會對結構造成影響,毋須事先申請" ----- 邏輯是自我批准.
      正垃圾, 應該要掟番去再考工程牌照, 竟然視法例如無物.
      BBTW

      刪除
    2. 這只是其中一個抗辨理由。
      最主要是爭議有關水池是否建築工程。

      刪除
  7. 請教一下,原審裁判官和上級法院都指控方證物P9支持PW1的證供,這不是屬於 previous consistent statement 的情況嗎?控方證物P9是PW1案發時對茶錢和佣金的紀錄,亦看不到有 recent fabrication 的指控。

    https://legalref.judiciary.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=120951&currpage=T

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. Why is it a previous consistent statement? P9 was made by D3 not by PW1. P9 corroborates PW1's testimony.

      15. 關於理由二,證物P9是第三被告人用藍墨水手寫的交易流程,供PW1參考及備忘。此文件是廉署人員拘捕PW1時檢獲的,故裁判官認為,PW1事前沒有機會在該文件上作任何添加或修改來配合她庭上的證供。裁判官指出,PW1必然是知道最終成交價為6,448,000元,才用紅墨水把大訂的金額由550,000元改為544,800元。而PW1用黑墨水記下2個單位買賣交易的佣金,亦必然是她知道三房單位的最終成交價為6,448,000元之後所作的紀錄,原因是她把三房單位的佣金寫為64,480元。裁判官進一步分析,如果PW1已向上訴人支付了10,000元佣金,她大可以把三房單位的佣金寫為或改作54,480元。但她沒有這樣做,反而用紅墨水獨立寫下「飲茶 $100.000」這記項。裁判官認為,這清楚顯示,PW1理解或接受該10,000元「茶錢」並非佣金的一部分。本席認同裁判官的觀察,證物P9的確強力支持PW1關於佣金和「茶錢」的證供。

      刪除
    2. While P9 was initially produced by D3, the magistrate and the appeal judge both relied on P9 in relation to the markings on it by PW1:

      (Statement of findings)
      29. 法庭留意到本案中並無任何獨立佐證支持控方第一證人的可信和可靠性,可是,法庭認為控方證物P9以及控方第一證人就這項證物作出的相關供詞和解釋,可賦予完全十足比重份量。控方證物P9是廉政公署調查人員在拘捕控方第一證人時檢獲的,控方第一證人沒有機會在文件上作出任何添加或修改。

      30. 法庭認為,如果茶錢只是100元,按常理,控方第一證人根本毋須特別作出記項,因此法庭接受她說只是手民之誤的解釋。這份文件顯示,控方第一證人原本打算以大約650萬元購買涉案單位,預計佣金為65,000元,並需於「成交當天」繳交,這與控方第一證人後來沒有在「交大訂」日支付佣金的做法完全吻合。

      31.法庭認為,控方第一證人必然是知道最終成交價為6,448,000元後,把大訂的金額從550,000元改為544,800元。從這文件記項的鋪排可見,控方第一證人用黑筆記下兩個單位買賣交易的佣金,必然是知道三房單位最終成交價為6,448,000元之後的事,因為她把涉及三房單位的佣金寫為64,480元。法庭認為,如果控方第一證人已經向第二被告人支付了10,000元佣金,她大可以把涉及三房單位的佣金寫為或是改為54,480元。可是她沒有這樣做,反而在文件中用紅筆記下「飲茶$100.000」這個記項。法庭認為,這清楚顯示控方第一證人了解到或是最終接受了該10,000元茶錢不是佣金的部分。

      (Appeal judgment)
      15. ...... 本席認同裁判官的觀察,證物P9的確強力支持PW1關於佣金和「茶錢」的證供。

      16. 本席沒有忽略,PW1在證物P9上把大訂544,800元寫為「544.8000」;3房佣金64,480元寫為「64,48」;飲茶10,000元寫為「100.000」。很明顯,上述看似的「錯誤」,其「錯處」基本上是一致的。本席相信,該些紀錄並非錯誤或不準確,純屬PW1個人的記數方式而已。

      刪除
    3. Yet, P9 was not the out of court statement which triggers the consideration of the issue of previous consistent statement.

      刪除
  8. https://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20190328/mobile/bkn-20190328214603599-0328_00822_001.html

    乜仲有得打?

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. DoJ probably alleging that His Lordship was factually perverse and speculated a scenario neither prosecution nor defence put forward and this speculation has no facts to support. Let's wait and see if CFA will grant leave to appeal.

      刪除
    2. Sorry, the application is before the High Court Judge to issue a certificate for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. I think the Judge (Joseph Yau) would refuse the application. Then DoJ would apply to CFA for leave.

      刪除
  9. 成班蠻夷 根本不懂持槍權的意義 係度鳩UP.

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 古代的蠻夷用矛用弓箭, 現代的用槍? 兔仔你上班帶多少枝槍去?

      刪除
    2. Your Second Amendment was stipulated in 1791. Move on. You are not riding a horse in the wild west now. Everyone is entitled to defend his right but not necessary to use a gun. You guys are so pathetic, always prefer a kangaroo court to rule.

      刪除
    3. To be fair, there are very remote places in the USA that may require firearms for safety and hunting.

      刪除
    4. I never dispute that but do some people just put the cart before the horse?

      刪除
  10. https://www.facebook.com/186040714921338/posts/1080812288777505/

    Blanchflower SC 對逃犯條例的批評

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. Blanchflower did a lot of extradition back then.

      刪除
  11. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201903/29/P2019032900264.htm?fontSize=1
    Kwan JA升上VP係咪即係意味Lam VP升CJHC?

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 唔係潘官咩?

      刪除
    2. Poon is only a JA. Lam is VP. I think it may take a while for Lam to be elevated to CJHC in order that Yeung VP can enjoy acting CJHC for a longer time during this extended appointment period. It is sort of consolation for his long service.

      刪除
    3. http://std.stheadline.com/daily/article/detail/1960699-港聞-潘兆初將任高院首席法官

      我都係睇呢到,唔知堅定流

      刪除
    4. I don't know. I just guessed. No insider information.

      刪除
  12. http://hd.stheadline.com/news/daily/hk/752750/

    何麗明審個單案又有新進展

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 睇黎個官要去驗下腦,佢真係令司法界蒙莜..

      刪除
    2. 如果不是這一宗未審完的案, 這位大人已不獲續聘。無得審到中途炒魷。

      刪除
    3. 其實可能中途炒魷,然後trial de novo,咁一早審完了,仲唔駛搞咁多枝節出來

      刪除
    4. 係咪專登拉布唔肯扯……

      刪除
    5. 8:31 中途炒魷可以, 但由誰下令trial de novo? 心人前未發生過炒魷的trial de novo, 個官病了、死了、走咗佬就有。不續約的都要執埋自己D手尾。

      蟻民 有點謀論, 但冇得撈這也是一種搵食方法。

      刪除
    6. 無獨有偶 兔兔最近 用專業知識幫助一位佔領弟兄 打甩一單交通官司 弟兄無罪 不用停牌

      還幫另外個弟兄的朋友 成功申請了守行為 (店鋪偷竊) 老大會不會怪我搶生意? ....

      刪除
    7. 這幾天特別多客仔, 你想做pro bono, 我畀晒你。

      刪除
  13. 博士做專家證人打甩好多單不小心駕駛

    何官真係與衆不同

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 不是博士, 紅衭仔出身。

      刪除
    2. 真好奇,盧先生沒有相關學位,以往點解有法庭可以接納佢做專家!

      刪除
  14. https://hk.news.appledaily.com/local/realtime/article/20190401/59436335

    大劉出手
    但佢個relief難度好高喎

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 係囉。不應留待澳門出手先去抗辯咩? 有排搞。

      刪除
    2. 可能佢驚等到澳門出手,佢就走唔切佬 haha
      不過其實佢等條例通過左先入稟都未遲...

      刪除
    3. 法例通過前佢要走佬

      刪除
    4. 生果報又將佢打造成抗政府英雄?呸!!!

      刪除