Skip to Content Facebook Feature Image

Nathan Law’s Ambiguous Response to “Sexual Assault Scandal” Fails to Clarify Allegations

Blog

Nathan Law’s Ambiguous Response to “Sexual Assault Scandal” Fails to Clarify Allegations
Blog

Blog

Nathan Law’s Ambiguous Response to “Sexual Assault Scandal” Fails to Clarify Allegations

2024-10-09 13:02 Last Updated At:13:02

Fugitive Nathan Law, after losing support in the UK, recently traveled to Taiwan, where he received backing from pro-independence groups and was seen with a local woman. However, his most pressing issue now is not the Hong Kong police’s cross-border pursuit but rather allegations of sexual assault involving a former female assistant from several years ago. The scandal has continued to gain traction, with members of the pro-democracy "Yellow Camp" openly criticizing him, significantly damaging his reputation. In an apparent attempt to address the issue, Law posted on social media yesterday, vaguely alluding to past incidents that might have caused "embarrassment" to the "involved party." He characterized it as a misunderstanding, denying any "violent intimate behavior."

Political insiders who reviewed his statement argue that this is merely a rhetorical maneuver. They point out that the assistant, who is the alleged victim, confided in members of the Yellow Camp at the time, and there are multiple witnesses. Despite Law’s attempts to explain, they believe he cannot fully exonerate himself. Furthermore, as the victim has not publicly disclosed the incident, it remains a metaphorical time bomb that could detonate and ruin Law’s reputation at any moment.

The alleged incident reportedly took place during Law’s peak period when he served as Chairman of the now-dissolved Demosistō and as a member of Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. At the time, he employed a female assistant, referred to here as "X," known for her linguistic skills and international engagement. In 2018, during a visit to Belgium, Law allegedly acted inappropriately towards X after consuming alcohol. According to sources within the Yellow Camp, X later confided in a close friend, but Law dismissed her claims, accusing her of seeking fame and attention.

Since X chose not to make the matter public, it gradually faded from public view. However, a month ago, the Hong Kong Democratic Committee suddenly severed ties with Law without explanation. Rumors soon surfaced suggesting the decision was linked to the sexual assault allegations, reigniting the controversy. The scandal even reached Oxford University, which cited Law’s misconduct as the reason for rejecting his application to a master’s program. The controversy then spread further, becoming a focal point of discussion among both the pro-democracy ("Yellow") and pro-establishment ("Blue") factions.

This controversy has significantly tarnished Law’s image and dealt a severe blow to his political career. His recent social media post appears to be an attempt to frame the incident as a "misunderstanding." In his statement, he acknowledged that he may have mishandled past relationships but insisted he had "never engaged in any intimate conduct against someone’s will or with violence." This statement suggests that some form of interaction occurred with X, but he claims it was consensual rather than non-consensual. In a previous interview with the online media outlet Notus, he described the encounter as "romantic."

A political insider remarked that in many sexual assault cases, men often claim that the other party was "willing," but judges rarely accept such defenses without credible testimony from the victim and corroborating evidence. Therefore, Law’s one-sided defense is seen as unconvincing.

Law also claimed in his post that he had engaged in "friendly and positive communication" with the "involved party" at the time and had kept relevant records. However, he added that he would not publicly clarify the matter unless absolutely necessary, citing multiple complicating factors. Political observers criticize this as another example of his "rhetorical maneuvering," suggesting he wants to appear as though he has evidence proving his innocence but is either unwilling or unable to disclose it, thereby creating an image of being unjustly accused.

In closing, Law issued an apology to X, expressing regret for any embarrassment or misunderstanding he may have caused her in the past. He also invited her to contact him directly to resolve any lingering issues. Political insiders interpret this as his attempt to downplay the incident as merely a "misunderstanding" and to reach a settlement with X.

The same insiders suggest that Law’s eagerness to address the scandal stems from his understanding that these sexual assault allegations are a severe threat to his career. Despite his efforts, his explanations remain weak, and the stigma of sexual misconduct continues to haunt him. They conclude that the unresolved allegations are like a ticking time bomb, poised to destroy his reputation completely when it explodes.

Lai Ting Yiu




What Say You?

** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **

C.Y. Leung just dropped receipts on Facebook. Next Digital's cash cow wasn't journalism—it was advertising. And the man squeezing those corporate wallets was Mark Simon, Jimmy Lai's American fixer, who sent letters to Hong Kong's biggest property developers that read like protection racket scripts. Pay up or face hostile coverage. Classic triad tactics, dressed in business English.
  
This isn't speculation. In July 2014, leaked documents from a "Next Digital shareholder" exposed the playbook. Among them: Mark Simon's threatening correspondence with a major corporation's chief executive. The message was blunt—advertise with us or watch your friendly coverage vanish. This is how Lai bankrolled his operation.
 
Mark Simon wore multiple hats beside Jimmy Lai. Former U.S. military intelligence officer. Next Digital's advertising director. The man who built Lai's financial pipeline and then distributed the cash to opposition figures and radical groups. His role was never just about selling ad space.

Jimmy Lai’s fixer Mark Simon used ad “sales” letters like a protection racket—buy space in Apple Daily or get hammered in the coverage.

Jimmy Lai’s fixer Mark Simon used ad “sales” letters like a protection racket—buy space in Apple Daily or get hammered in the coverage.

  
The Shakedown Letters
The leaked documents from July 2014 pulled back the curtain. Media reports at the time confirmed that Mark Simon, during his tenure as advertising director, sent threatening letters to a major conglomerate's top executive. The approach: carrot and stick, heavy on the stick.
  
In the letter, Simon claimed he wanted to repair relations. Then came the threat: refuse to advertise with Next Digital and the "friendly relationship" ends. Translation: attack pieces resume. He followed up with another letter demanding a face-to-face meeting, warning that future cooperation between Next Digital and the conglomerate would become "difficult" without compliance.
  
The leaked documents contained no reply from the conglomerate, so we don't know their response. What we do know: major corporations kept advertising in Apple Daily during that period. The shakedown likely worked.
  
Bankrolling the Opposition
Mark Simon didn't just collect money for Boss Lai—he distributed it to pan-democrats and radical groups. The leaked documents revealed the operation's scope, particularly around the 2014 Occupy Central movement, when funding flowed freely.
 
Two months before Occupy Central formally launched, Jimmy Lai and Mark Simon exchanged emails discussing a "June special project." Lai funneled HK$9.5 million through Simon to the Democratic Party, Civic Party, and others—seed money to push Occupy Central forward.
 
The pair also provided approximately HK$3.5 million for the "June 22 Civil Referendum"—publicity and promotion for a stunt that mobilized citizens to select proposals for "universal suffrage for Chief Executive." This built momentum for Occupy Central. The operation was led by Benny Tai and Robert Chung, but Lai was the financier pulling strings from behind. The leaked emails even caught Lai mocking the "Occupy Trio" as scholars with ideas but no strategy, saying he had no choice but to help them—meaning he wanted control.

Big-brand ad money kept Apple Daily flush with cash, letting Lai pour funds into pan-democrats and radical groups on a grand scale.

Big-brand ad money kept Apple Daily flush with cash, letting Lai pour funds into pan-democrats and radical groups on a grand scale.

 
The Money Pipeline
From 2013 to 2020, Mark Simon controlled Jimmy Lai's cash spigot. Court testimony revealed that Lai opened nine accounts over those seven years, transferring HK$118 million to Simon. Of that sum, HK$93 million went to pan-democratic parties and political figures.
  
The timeline matters. From September to December 2019—right after the anti-extradition bill unrest erupted—Simon distributed funds ranging from HK$8 million to HK$1 million to the Civic Party, Democratic Party, Labour Party, League of Social Democrats, Au Nok-hin, and Lee Yu-hin. Pouring fuel on the fire while Hong Kong burned.
 
Who Is Mark Simon Really?
Simon fled to the United States, so his true identity remains murky. But the evidence points to something beyond a simple business relationship. One detail stands out: Simon's access to White House National Security Council meetings. He knew the latest deployments, including actions following the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act signing and even Trump's thinking, which he then reported back to Boss Lai.
  
Political observers who've tracked Simon speculate he may have operated with dual identities from the start—both Lai's right-hand man, helping establish direct channels to Washington, and a covert operative planted by the Americans to pull the strings of this particular puppet.
 
Given Mark Simon's shadowy role, Western politicians and media portraying Jimmy Lai as a simple "freedom of the press warrior" tells you everything about their credibility. It's a lie told with a straight face.
 
Lai Ting-yiu

Recommended Articles