The verdict lands today, and Jimmy Lai Chee-ying is found guilty on three counts — conspiracy to collude with foreign forces and publishing seditious materials, all tied to the Hong Kong National Security Law. For months, anti-China figures keep selling the same dramatic line: Lai is being treated inhumanely and is supposedly in terrible shape.
Right before the ruling, Lai’s two children go to overseas outlets including Agence France-Presse (AFP) with a grim portrait. They say he is far weaker, his teeth are gradually rotting, and his fingernails discolour and fall off — turning “almost purple, grey and greenish before they fell off” — and they urge the UK and the US to step in and pressure China.
But the scene in court tells a very different story — and it’s hard to miss. Observers say Lai has slimmed down, yes, but he looks alert and in decent spirits, walks normally, and doesn’t need anyone to hold him up; he waves to his family going in and trades hand gestures with his lawyers going out, and one witness says his fingernails look pink, not “discoloured and falling off” as claimed.
Meanwhile, the long-running accusation that Lai is abused in custody — and denied proper care — keeps getting recycled. On that point, Chief Superintendent Steve Li Kwai-wah of the Police National Security Department speaks to reporters today, describing how the Correctional Services Department handles Lai’s health.
So what’s the medical record? Li lays it out plainly. Since 2022, offshore groups who’ve never even met Lai in custody keep manufacturing malicious accusations --claiming inhumane treatment, declining health, the whole playbook – trying to smear the government and meddle with the trial. But the facts tell another story. Lai’s own legal representatives issued a statement in September 2024 clarifying he's been getting proper care all along.
During closing arguments on August 15 this year, the court reveals what actually happened: Lai reports palpitations, and the Correctional Services Department immediately arranges specialist diagnosis; his ECG and blood test results come back normal, yet doctors still recommend that he wears a dynamic ECG monitor and receive daily blood pressure and pulse checks from medical staff. Even the judge praises the Correctional Services Department’s medical arrangements for Lai in court.
Li also points to another overseas-media claim — this time from Lai’s daughter — saying his vision and hearing have sharply declined, he has mobility problems, and a welfare officer advised her not to visit. Authorities say they find no such record, and Li calls it a “smear campaign” aimed at seriously damaging Hong Kong’s system.
Li digs deeper into the allegations. He notes that Lai’s daughter, Lai Choi, claims a welfare officer called in 2024 to cancel a visit, because her father was too sick to see anyone. But the official logs prove that call never existed – exposing her claim as yet another malicious smear fueled by fake news.
When you put all the facts together, the familiar anti-China script claiming that "Jimmy Lai was abused" simply collapses under scrutiny.
Ariel
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
Since the Hong Kong National Security Law (NSL) implemented in 2020, we’ve seen plenty of high-profile cases hit the courts, and the verdicts are rolling in. But the real issue is a pattern that’s too obvious to ignore: whenever the heat turns up on these major national security charges, the people with legal degrees are the first ones to run for the exits, cut ties, or plead guilty to save their own skin.
The 'Gang of Four' Breaks Rank
Make no mistake: Martin Lee, the founding chairman of the Democratic Party and long branded as one of the "Gang of Four" damaging Hong Kong, spent years lobbying in Europe and the US alongside former Chief Secretary Anson Chan. Their goal: begging foreign politicians to slap sanctions on SAR government officials.
Democratic Party founding chairman Martin Lee, who knew when to stop talking.
However, right before the NSL came into effect in 2020, both Lee and Chan suddenly hit the brakes to find a way out.
Just weeks before the law took effect on June 30, 2020, Martin Lee sat down with The New York Times and suddenly changed his tune. In that interview, the seasoned Senior Counsel had plenty to say about opposing violence, even slamming the "laam chau" (mutual destruction) crowd as "haven’t got a clue". He bluntly stated: "If you start the revolution, and then you’re completely defeated, many people will die with you. So how does that help Hong Kong?" He even claimed he had "always stood by One Country, Two Systems" and criticized independence calls for costing Hong Kong international support.
What matters is the timing. Commentators noted that while the NSL isn't retrospective, it clearly defines "collusion with foreign forces." Martin Lee, as the most senior “Senior Counsel” in the game, knew exactly where the risks were. By high-profilely "cutting ties" in foreign media, he was effectively announcing in advance that he wouldn't dare cross the line once the law was in force.
The receipts show Lee isn’t new to this—he’s been arrested three times for unauthorized processions. Take the "8.18 Unauthorized Assembly Case" of 2019: he was convicted of both "organizing" and "participating," landing an 11-month sentence suspended for 24 months.
Lee and six others, however, wouldn't just accept the verdict. They appealed, managing to get the "organizing" charge quashed by the Court of Appeal, but the "participating" conviction stuck. Not content to leave it there, they dragged the case all the way to the Court of Final Appeal—only to suffer a final, definitive defeat.
Admitting Guilt to Save Themselves
Then you have Alvin Yeung, the former Civic Party leader and practicing barrister, who pleaded guilty in the "35+ Subversion Case." Yeung pleaded guilty while in remand, cooperated with police, and expressed remorse early. He ended up with 5 years and 1 month, and estimates suggest he’ll be walking free this March.
Alvin Yeung, former Civic Party leader and barrister, changed his tune once he was the one facing jail time.
During his mitigation in September 2024, Yeung admitted that as a lawyer, confessing to a criminal offense was embarrassing. He acknowledged his naivety and blind passion led him astray, dragging Civic Party members into "this hopeless and illegal scheme" and causing his family immense anxiety. He even admitted his rhetoric worsened the political situation and promised to quit politics for good.
But consider this hypocrisy: back in 2017, at a rally for the anti-North East New Territories development case defendants, Yeung famously said that for those imprisoned, "this criminal record makes their lives more colorful." That tune changed pretty quickly to "regret" and "embarrassment" once he was the one in handcuffs facing national security charges.
Exiting the Stage Entirely
Another example is Yeung’s former colleague, Tanya Chan. In September 2020—right after the NSL landed—Chan, a barrister and Civic Party co-founder, suddenly decided to quit the party and politics altogether. She claimed major brain surgery meant health and family were her only priorities. She then moved solo to Taiwan, ditching the barrister robes to become a chef in a private kitchen.
After fleeing to Taiwan, Tanya Chan went from barrister to chef, keeping a low profile.
And let’s not forget the classic case: Benny Tai. The former HKU law professor and mastermind behind the "35+ Subversion Case" was categorized as a "principal offender." Yet, even he pleaded guilty as early as the third mention. As a legal scholar, Tai knew the math: pleading guilty gets you a one-third sentence reduction. The earlier, the better. The court set a 15-year starting point, but thanks to his plea, he got 10 years.
Benny Tai, the legal scholar who did the math and pleaded guilty early in the "35+ Subversion Case." (Image source: Sing Tao Daily)(圖片來源:星島日報)
An insider puts it bluntly: these examples prove that the people who know the law best—barristers and scholars—know that once the evidence is irrefutable, they have zero chance of winning. They dissociate or plead guilty immediately to minimize the damage.
The key point: deep down, these people knew exactly where the "legal lines" were and that they had violated the National Security Law. Repenting early and backpedaling fast was simply the smartest play they had left.
