Jimmy Lai, founder of Next Digital, faced trial Thursday at the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts, temporarily serving as the High Court, on charges of “conspiracy to collude with foreign forces” and other offenses.

On the 27th day of testimony, the defense concluded its questioning in the morning, allowing the prosecution to begin cross-examination. Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang expressed concerns about the time required for the process, noting he is scheduled to preside over another lengthy trial in May. Prosecutors estimated they would need 10 to 15 days for cross-examination, expecting to finish by the second week of February.

During questioning, Lai confirmed he was charged with fraud and collusion with foreign forces in December 2020 and denied bail, resulting in his remand. Although the High Court granted him bail under strict conditions on Dec. 23, the Court of Final Appeal revoked it about a week later, leaving him in custody for over four years.

The defense referenced an article published shortly after Lai’s remand, titled “Jimmy Lai: Have No Fear, Keep Fighting; Son Delivers Apple Daily But Correctional Service Rejects It.” Lai admitted to sending messages through his lawyer to comfort and encourage his colleagues. He explained that the phrase “keep fighting” symbolized the challenges facing Apple Daily at the time, saying, “For Apple Daily, operating was almost synonymous with fighting on.”

The case is being heard by High Court judges designated under the National Security Law: Esther Toh Lye-ping, Susana Maria D’Almada Remedios, and Alex Lee Wan-tang. The prosecution team includes Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Anthony Chau Tin-hang, Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions Ivan Cheung Cheuk-kan, and Senior Public Prosecutor Crystal Chan Wing-sum. Lai is represented by senior counsel Robert Pang Yiu-hung, barrister Steven Kwan, and New Zealand King’s Counsel Marc Corlett, who is also qualified to practice in Hong Kong.

Detailed Transcription

16:32 Court Adjourns 

16:12 Prosecution Alleges Lai Facilitated U.S. Officials’ Meeting with Tsai Ing-wen for Military Upgrades; Lai Denies

The prosecution presented a conversation between Lai and Antonio Chiang Chun-nan from August 21, 2017, where Lai shared personal details about former U.S. Consul General in Hong Kong, James Cunningham. Lai explained in court that Chiang mentioned needing assistance in engaging with the U.S. government due to a lack of effective connections. Lai, knowing Cunningham was a diplomat, recommended him. The prosecution questioned if Lai was helping Taiwan establish diplomatic channels in the U.S., to which Lai responded that Taiwan already had such channels. When pressed, Lai clarified that his actions aimed to make existing channels more effective rather than establishing new ones.

The prosecution presented a subsequent message from Lai to Chiang on August 28, 2017, stating:

“A long-term energy contract, as Taiwan is back into the radar, is to put light in Washington’s eye. It prompts constant communication with Washington. Recruit retired American generals to upgrade military mentality as a base to upgrade military in general. The last is to hire a top-notch diplomat to reset constant contacts on the diplomatic floor in Washington. These are the points I want to make to the boss. Actually, you can convey it clearly to her. I’ve no need to see her. But those are very good advice worth the boss’ thought on them.”

The prosecution alleged that the reference to “recruiting retired American generals” was aimed at Jack Keane. Lai denied this, emphasizing the use of the plural “generals,” which did not specifically refer to Keane. When pressed further, Lai acknowledged that Keane was a retired general but explained that the reference was to lower-ranking retired generals, stating: “You can suggest anything, but that’s not true!”

The prosecution argued that the meeting between Jack Keane, Paul Wolfowitz, and Tsai Ing-wen was related to military upgrades. Lai reiterated that it was about the Trump administration’s stance on Taiwan and denied any connection to military upgrades. He accused the prosecution of fabricating claims.

The prosecution presented messages between Lai and Mark Simon, in which Simon said:

“I will let Jack and Paul know. I will be talking to Paul tomorrow. The delay is that the Justice Department has rejected the contract Paul and Jack want as Justice wants to list it as lobbying. So they are trying again this week. I spoke extensively with Paul last week and I do feel their lawyer is far too cautious, and Jack agrees with this.”
 

The prosecution asked if this suggested that the meeting’s nature was lobbying. Lai denied this, explaining that the Justice Department had classified it as lobbying, which led to the initial rejection. The prosecution then displayed follow-up messages from Simon stating:

“We have good news from DOJ. They approved the consulting contract approach with Paul and Jack.”

Lai confirmed that he later learned of the contract’s approval by the Justice Department.

The prosecution further presented messages where Lai inquired about expense allocations. Simon explained:

“As for the balance, no. We have expenses come in, such as Trust fees, or in this case we have bills from Paul and Jack for those not cheap FARA lawyers.”
 

Lai confirmed that the legal fees were related to dealings with the Justice Department and that the payments were made in his name.

15:50 Messages Show Lai Referred to Meeting Recap; Lai Claims He Only Discussed the Content During Dinner

The prosecution presented a July 21, 2017, conversation between Jimmy Lai and Antonio Chiang Chun-nan, in which Lai said:
“Paul and Jack are ready to make the trip. Please make it a routine that they spend 3 days each time with the president and her people concerned. I’ll come at the end to do follow-up with them.”

The prosecution asked if this meeting was also related to Tsai Ing-wen’s desire to understand the Trump administration’s stance. Lai confirmed this. When asked how many such meetings he arranged, Lai said he could not remember, explaining that the arrangements were made individually rather than all at once. When asked if he participated in the discussions, Lai said he did not attend the meetings but followed up on Keane and Wolfowitz’s progress and handled logistical issues.

The prosecution asked if Lai’s role was to arrange the itinerary. Lai agreed.

The prosecution then showed an August 1, 2017, conversation between Mark Simon and Lai, where Simon wrote:
“How are you? General Keane and Paul Wolfowitz will be in Taipei on 16th… Can we arrange a meeting with the president on one of those days?”

The prosecution asked if Simon was involved in arranging the meetings between Jack Keane, Paul Wolfowitz, and Tsai Ing-wen. Lai agreed and confirmed that Keane and Wolfowitz eventually met with Tsai.

The prosecution presented a conversation between Lai and Chiang on August 19, 2017, three days after the meeting between Jack Keane, Paul Wolfowitz, and Tsai. Lai mentioned topics such as a ten-year contract to ensure Taiwan’s energy security, military modernization, and weapons modernization, and referred to the content as a “recap.” The prosecution asked if this was a recap of the meeting. Lai denied it, stating that the content was not from the meeting itself but was discussed informally during dinner afterward. He then relayed this information to Chiang.

Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang asked who attended the dinner. Lai replied that it included himself, Jack Keane, and Paul Wolfowitz. He could not recall if Mark Simon was present but confirmed that Chiang was not.

Judge Esther Toh Lye-ping referred to Lai’s message mentioning:
“That gives the chance and excuses for the Boss to talk with Trump personally more often, through John Kelly.”
Toh asked who the “Boss” referred to. Lai said it referred to Tsai Ing-wen, explaining that she could not communicate directly with Trump as it would offend China.

15:15 Judge Questions Whether Lai Facilitated U.S.-Taiwan Meetings; Lai Denies, Saying He’s Not a “Middleman”

The prosecution referenced Lai’s note, which included the following passage:
“Strictly confidential: There’s no better leverage than Taiwan. It leverages on China where it hurts most and is also the most efficient. As long as China doesn’t want a war—and it doesn’t, as its reaction to Tsai’s phone call obviously shows.”

The prosecution asked if Lai was advocating for the U.S. to use Taiwan as leverage against China. Lai responded that such views were already present in media discussions. Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang questioned why confidentiality was necessary if the idea had already been discussed in the media. Lai explained:
“Although it is mentioned already in some of the commentary in the news, I just don’t want myself to be in this position because I’m a Chinese in Hong Kong.”

Judge Lee asked if this meant Lai did not want people to know he held these views. Lai agreed. The prosecution further asked if Lai also did not want others to know that he proposed these ideas. Lai denied this, clarifying that the ideas were not his but had been widely discussed in the media. When asked why confidentiality was still required, Lai said that discussing such topics was sensitive for a Chinese person in Hong Kong.

Judge Esther Toh Lye-ping noted that Lai had expressed similar views on his Live Chat program. Lai explained that the program aired two years after the note was written and that circumstances had changed. When asked why he revisited such a sensitive topic, Lai stated that by then, the situation had evolved, and the topic was more openly discussed, even among Asians.

Judge Lee asked if discussing U.S. military presence in Taiwan was more sensitive after the National Security Law came into effect. Lai replied that the context was different and that expressing such views was not equivalent to breaking the law. He emphasized that such ideas had been circulating in the media for a long time.

The prosecution asked if Lai agreed that Taiwan needed a greater U.S. “military presence.” Lai clarified that he did not use the term “greater,” only that such a presence was necessary.

Judge Susana Maria D’Almada Remedios questioned whether Lai had coordinated meetings between Taiwan and the U.S. She added, “You’re the middleman!” Lai denied this, responding, “I’m not going to be a middleman to do this. I’m not in the position to do that.”

Judge D’Almada Remedios pointed out that Lai had contacted Jack Keane. Lai clarified that the note was for John Bolton, not related to Jack Keane. He added that Bolton was not a government official but someone interested in Taiwan-related issues.

The prosecution presented a January 17, 2017, message in which Mark Simon forwarded an article written by John Bolton in The Wall Street Journal titled “Revisit the ‘One-China Policy’.” The prosecution suggested the article’s content was similar to Lai’s note. Lai agreed they were similar but stated he did not explicitly agree or disagree with the article.

The prosecution further noted that the article’s ideas were similar to the messages Lai had advocated. Lai denied advocating any messages. Judge Lee asked why Mark Simon had forwarded the article. Lai said Simon frequently shared articles he found interesting. When asked if Lai had told Simon about his note to Bolton, Lai said he had not.

Judge Lee pointed out that both Lai’s note and Bolton’s article used the term “Beijing’s belligerence.” He asked if this was a coincidence. Lai responded that it was common knowledge.

15:05 Lai: Jack Keane Consulted Tsai Ing-wen and Needed to Inform Trump for Approval

On the same day, Lai sent a message to Antonio Chiang Chun-nan, stating:

“Jack will let Trump know about this independent consultancy and his support (he’s sure about that) and thereby get things done more conveniently. But we must keep this consultancy absolutely confidential to make it efficient to get things done for us. Once the media knows about it, it’s spoilt. The phone call is only the first step. I’ve prepared a note for my meeting with Bolton tomorrow. I enclose it here. It’s only my own initial thoughts, and I will make it clear to John. But please destroy it after you’ve read it. Don’t show it to anyone.”

The prosecution asked what the “independent consultancy” referred to. Lai explained that it was related to Tsai Ing-wen consulting on the U.S. government’s stance toward Taiwan. When the prosecution noted that Lai mentioned Jack Keane informing Trump about the arrangement, Lai responded that he believed it was necessary for Keane to do so, stating, “I think this is not more than a courtesy, but I think this is necessary.”

The prosecution asked if this was because the matter invol  was ved the Trump administration. Lai denied this, explaining that it was to see if Trump would agree and support it. The prosecution questioned why Jack Keane, who no longer held public office, needed to inform Trump. Lai said that as a former senior official, Keane still required government approval. He added that since Keane had access to Trump, informing him was essential to determine whether Trump would approve or support the initiative. If Trump didn’t support it, Keane wouldn’t proceed.

The prosecution referred to Lai’s note prepared for his meeting with John Bolton, asking who Bolton was. Lai replied that he couldn’t recall whether Bolton was serving as Trump’s National Security Advisor at the time but remembered planning to meet him. Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang asked if Lai had prepared the note himself. Lai confirmed that he had, noting that Bolton had a strong interest in Taiwan and often wrote articles about its situation.

The prosecution asked if the note Lai shared with Bolton was meant to be communicated to Tsai Ing-wen via Chiang. Lai responded that it was not appropriate to inform Tsai because she was overly cautious. He clarified that the note was only meant for discussion with Chiang. When asked if Lai did not want Tsai to be informed of the note’s contents, Lai agreed, saying this was why confidentiality was necessary.

The prosecution then questioned why Lai shared the note with Chiang. Lai explained that he and Chiang often exchanged views on Taiwan-related matters. When asked why Lai instructed Chiang to destroy the note after reading it, Lai stated that it was because the note contained sensitive information.

14:52 Prosecution Questions Why Lai Requested Confidentiality for Meeting with Tsai Ing-wen

The prosecution referred to a January 5, 2017, message from Jimmy Lai to Antonio Chiang:

“I had a wonderful meeting with General Jack and Paul. Jack has become a personal advisor to Trump and is willing to help. Actually, the appointment on the 19th is ok now; Jack has confirmed to come. We’ve worked something out that I’ve to meet her before she goes abroad if possible. Very good for us, so important. Can I have a word with her before she goes overseas? Just 15 minutes. Very important and confidential. I can’t relate on here. Thanks, Jimmy.”

Lai confirmed that the “her” in the message referred to Tsai Ing-wen. The prosecution asked why Lai emphasized confidentiality. Lai explained that Jack Keane and Paul Wolfowitz wanted to understand what Tsai intended to learn, so they could prepare accordingly.

When asked why the matter required confidentiality, Lai stated that the entire event needed to be kept confidential due to the sensitive identities of Jack Keane and Paul Wolfowitz.

The prosecution questioned if the need for confidentiality was related to Lai’s earlier suggestion about leveraging Taiwan. Lai responded that he had already indicated the need for confidentiality in the WhatsApp message and had explained the reason, adding that the prosecution was “asking redundant questions.”

The prosecution noted that Lai had mentioned in the message, “I can’t relate on here.” Lai reiterated that he wanted to ask Tsai what information she sought, which he would then relay to Jack Keane and Paul Wolfowitz.

14:39 Lai: Antonio Chiang Asked If He Could Introduce Americans to Advise on Taiwan Issues

Regarding Lai introducing Jack Keane and Paul Wolfowitz to Tsai Ing-wen, the prosecution asked what Lai meant when he said, “Tsai Ing-wen wanted to understand the U.S. government’s views and stance on Taiwan.” Lai explained that it referred to the U.S. government’s perspective on issues and relations concerning Taiwan.

The prosecution asked why Lai chose to introduce Jack Keane and Paul Wolfowitz. Lai responded that it was because they were his friends. When asked if it was solely because they were his friends, Lai added that they were also knowledgeable about the U.S. government’s views on Taiwan. The prosecution then asked if Lai had any involvement beyond the introduction. Lai said he did not.

When asked if Lai’s involvement was limited to introducing the two individuals, Lai clarified that he also covered their travel expenses and paid for Jack Keane’s consulting fees for advising Tsai Ing-wen. The prosecution asked if the meeting between Keane, Wolfowitz, and Tsai was Lai’s idea. Lai stated that it was Antonio Chiang who asked if he knew any Americans who could provide insights on the U.S. government’s views on Taiwan.

The prosecution further questioned whether it was Chiang who first suggested the meeting. Lai explained that Chiang inquired if he knew anyone who could offer advice.

Referring to a message Lai sent to Chiang, where he wrote, “China needs to solve the present deadlock more than us now,” Judge Esther Toh Lye-ping asked whom Lai meant by “us.” Lai said he might have been referring to Taiwan. When asked if “us” included Lai himself, Lai responded that while he considered himself part of Taiwan, in this context, “us” referred to Taiwan.

The prosecution presented a December 5, 2016, message from Lai to Chiang:
“Antonio, there’s an urgency to meet her with Chan if it can be arranged before 13rd Dec. Thanks, Jimmy.”

Chiang replied: “I’ll pass it over to the office and get back to you as soon as possible.”

The prosecution asked why Lai described the meeting as urgent. Lai said he could not recall, nor could he remember who “Chan” referred to in the message. However, he confirmed that “her” referred to Tsai Ing-wen.

12:51 Lunch

12:35 Judge Questions Why Jack Keane and Others’ Taiwan Visit Required Confidentiality; Lai: Former U.S. Officials Needed Permission

The prosecution presented a December 12, 2016, conversation between Jimmy Lai and Antonio Chiang Chun-nan. Lai wrote:

“I actually just want to emphasize that now is the time for a China breakthrough. More pressure I’m sure will build up as if the U.S. is about to use Taiwan to leverage China’s North Korea and South Sea belligerence. There will be loose talks for those soldiers moving out of Japan to move to Taiwan. China needs to solve the present deadlock more than us now. China wants no war. Now is the time to move to let local governments have the rights to open the doors now shut.”
 

Chiang replied that Tsai Ing-wen wanted to invite Lai to her residence for a meal.

The prosecution suggested that the idea of leveraging Taiwan against China seemed to originate from Lai. Lai responded that it was U.S. policy. The prosecution then questioned whether Lai intended to convey this idea to Taiwan’s leadership. Lai clarified that he merely passed the message to Chiang and did not propose a meeting with Tsai; it was Chiang who suggested it.

The prosecution presented another message from January 5, 2017, between Lai and Mark Simon:

“I had a wonderful dinner meeting with General and Paul. Just wonderful! He’s going to Taipei with Paul and work on the project with liaison to Trump, though the consultancy will be independent and non-political. This must be handled with strict confidentiality because once the media picks it up, it will destroy it.”
 

Simon replied:
“Sounds great and will handle with strict confidentiality and work as per Paul.”
(Chinese translation: 聽起來不錯，將嚴格保密並與 Paul 工作。)

Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang asked if Lai believed at the time that Trump would listen to Jack Keane and Paul Wolfowitz. Lai said he did not believe Paul Wolfowitz would have influence, but Jack Keane had met with Trump multiple times, though he was unsure of the extent of their influence.

The prosecution asked if Keane had a close relationship with Trump. Lai responded that he did not know if it was “very close” but acknowledged that they had met several times. Judge Esther Toh Lye-ping clarified: “So they had a close relationship, but you don’t know if it was very close?” Lai agreed.

When asked about the phrase “work on the project with liaison to Trump” in the message, Lai explained that it referred to consulting with Tsai Ing-wen. Tsai wanted to understand the Trump administration’s stance on Taiwan, and the project was independent and non-political.

Judge Lee questioned why the consultation needed to remain confidential. Lai explained that Keane and Wolfowitz held sensitive positions as former senior U.S. officials and needed permission from the U.S. government to conduct such consultations.

Judge Susana Maria D’Almada Remedios asked if the two were visiting Taiwan in an official capacity on behalf of the U.S. government. Lai clarified that they were not; they traveled to Taiwan at his invitation. Judge Toh pressed further, stating she did not understand why confidentiality was necessary if they were visiting as private U.S. citizens. Lai reiterated that their identities were sensitive and prior permission was required.

12:18 Lai Confirms Introducing Former U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense to Tsai Ing-wen and Covering Their Visit Costs

The prosecution inquired about former U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, noting that he was also a guest on the “Live Chat” program and that Lai had hired him as a consultant when he considered investing in Myanmar. Lai confirmed this.

The prosecution presented a message Lai sent to Paul Wolfowitz on July 8, 2019:
“Paul, thank you so much for the advice. It’s really useful. I’m ready in the building, maybe difficult to make calls.”

Another message was shown:
“Your friendship means the world to me. You are a very rare individual, and I have to admit a little bit that I enjoy being associated with your great reputation, even if perhaps because it makes the commies dislike me.”

Lai confirmed his close friendship with Paul Wolfowitz and stated that they stayed in contact and met between 2016 and 2020. When asked if he met with Jack Keane and Paul Wolfowitz multiple times, Lai agreed but noted that he met Wolfowitz more frequently than Keane.

The prosecution asked why Lai met with both individuals. Lai explained that they shared mutual friends and met socially as good friends. When asked if there were any other purposes for their meetings, Lai said there were none.

The prosecution then asked if Lai had traveled to Taipei with Jack Keane and Paul Wolfowitz. Lai confirmed, stating that the purpose was to meet Tsai Ing-wen, as she wanted to understand the U.S. government’s views and stance on Taiwan, which Keane and Wolfowitz helped explain.

When asked how he knew Tsai Ing-wen, Lai said he had known her for many years. The prosecution asked who introduced Tsai to Lai, and Lai replied that he met her at a party hosted by the then-U.S. Consul in Taiwan when he started his business there. The prosecution asked if Lai introduced Tsai to Keane and Wolfowitz, and Lai confirmed this.

The prosecution asked if the Taipei trip was the only meeting between Tsai and Keane and Wolfowitz. Lai responded that after the initial introduction, Keane and Wolfowitz visited Taiwan 3 to 4 more times. When asked if Lai arranged these visits, he agreed and confirmed that he covered their travel expenses.

The prosecution asked if Lai paid both individuals directly. Lai said he wasn’t sure but noted that payments to Jack Keane were made through Mark Simon.

Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang asked when these events took place. The prosecution stated they occurred between 2017 and 2019. Judge Lee asked why Lai paid Jack Keane. Lai explained it was because Keane provided advice to Tsai Ing-wen. When Judge Lee asked why the Taiwan government didn’t pay Keane, Lai said it was his arrangement and that Keane was his friend, so he asked him for help. He also noted that Tsai was unaware of the payments.

The prosecution asked if Lai proactively paid them to secure their services. Lai agreed.

12:00 Lai Acknowledges Jack Keane’s Close Ties to Trump but Denies His Significant Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy

The prosecution presented a January 5, 2017, WhatsApp conversation between Jimmy Lai and former Taiwan Apple Daily advisor and columnist Antonio Chiang Chun-nan, in which Lai wrote:
“I had a wonderful meeting with General Jack Keane and Paul. Jack has become a personal advisor to Trump and is willing to help. Actually, the appointment on 19th is ok now.”

The prosecution noted that Lai had described Chiang as then-President Tsai Ing-wen’s “right-hand man” and pointed out that Lai was aware of Jack Keane’s role as Trump’s personal advisor and his close ties to the former president. Lai confirmed this.

The prosecution then referred to a November 9, 2017, WhatsApp conversation between Lai and Mark Simon, where Simon wrote:

 “Jimmy, the only thing is they have not said for certain the dates; they are going to Kyoto… Also, just as an FYI, it looks like from what people inside the White House have said. Jack and his view on China being expansionist has the ear of Mattis and the President. Jack was very vocal in the press leading up to President Trump’s trip as part of an obvious campaign to let the Chinese know what U.S. position is on North Korea.”

When the prosecution asked whether Lai knew that Jack Keane had captured the attention of the president, Lai said he believed so because Mark Simon had told him. Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang asked if Lai trusted the information Simon provided. Lai confirmed that he did.

Lai responded to Simon’s message, saying: “Good to hear about Jack’s aggressive position. I hope Tsai notices that.” The prosecution asked if “Jack’s aggressive position” referred to China. Lai said it did not and clarified that it was about the U.S. military, as Keane advocated for increased military budgets.

The prosecution asked if Lai supported Jack Keane’s actions. Lai replied that saying “Good to hear” did not indicate support. When asked why he would say “Good to hear” if he did not support Keane, Lai explained that the phrase was meant as “Thank you.” Judge Lee pressed further, asking if Lai agreed with Keane’s actions. Lai acknowledged that he did, stating, “Otherwise, I wouldn’t say ‘Good to hear.’”

The prosecution presented a March 6, 2020, WhatsApp message from Lai to Simon, in which Lai forwarded a tweet from Jack Keane:
“I am honored and overwhelmed by President Trump’s decision to award the Medal of Freedom. I lived a military life among heroes who were and always will be my inspiration.”

The prosecution asked if the Medal of Freedom is awarded to those who have made significant contributions to the United States. Lai agreed it was a significant honor but added, “The rest is your interpretation.” Judge Esther Toh Lye-ping asked if Lai knew the medal was awarded for contributions to the United States. Lai speculated that it might also relate to Keane’s close relationship with Trump and did not necessarily reflect significant contributions to the country.

Judge Toh further asked if Lai believed the medal could be awarded for helping Trump rather than the nation. Lai agreed.

The prosecution presented a May 31, 2020, WhatsApp message from Simon to Lai, stating:
“Jimmy, I just heard from General Keane. He just finished speaking to Pompeo. On Tuesday, he and Vice President Pence will talk to President Trump about a phone call to you or, as another option, a tweet out to you.”

The prosecution asked if Lai was aware of the close relationships between Simon and Jack Keane, as well as Keane and Trump. Lai confirmed this. However, when asked if Jack Keane had significant influence on U.S. military strategy and foreign policy, Lai disagreed.

11:43 Judge Concerns Over Cross-Examination Timeline, Notes Upcoming Long Trial in May; Prosecution Estimates 10-15 Days Needed

Before the prosecution began its questioning, Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang mentioned he has a lengthy trial scheduled to begin in early May and asked Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Anthony Chau Tin-hang about the time required for cross-examination in this case to determine if the other trial needs to be postponed. Chau estimated that the cross-examination would take 10 to 15 days and could be completed by the second week of February.

The prosecution presented the “Political Connections Chart” mentioned in its opening statements and cited Lai’s earlier testimony, in which he stated he had never attempted to use individuals listed on the chart to influence Hong Kong or China’s foreign policy. Lai confirmed this statement.

Focusing on individuals in the chart, the prosecution highlighted retired U.S. General Jack Keane and former U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. The prosecution noted that Jack Keane is Lai’s friend and a guest on the “Live Chat with Jimmy Lai” program. Lai confirmed and explained that his assistant, Mark Simon, had invited Keane to participate in the program.

The prosecution asked if Lai first met Jack Keane in August 2016. Lai said he could not recall. The prosecution then presented a WhatsApp message from August 2016 between Lai and Mark Simon, which read:
“Mark, have you got General Jack Keane’s email for follow-up on our invitation to Paris in October? Thanks. Jimmy.”

Lai explained that he was following up on the invitation to Paris. The prosecution pointed out that Lai must have already known Jack Keane by 2016. Lai agreed.

The prosecution asked if Lai maintained contact with Jack Keane between 2016 and 2020. Lai responded, “until now” (up to the present). When asked if he met Keane several times in 2017, Lai said he could not remember but acknowledged it might have been more than a few times.

The prosecution stated that Lai traveled to Washington, Paris, and Taipei in 2017. Lai confirmed he did not meet Jack Keane in Paris. The prosecution inquired whether Lai communicated with Keane via email, WhatsApp, or phone. Lai replied that he could not recall if they spoke by phone but agreed that the other methods of communication were accurate.

The prosecution noted that Lai also contacted Jack Keane through Mark Simon. Lai confirmed. Finally, the prosecution pointed out that Donald Trump served as U.S. President from 2017 to 2021 and had invited Jack Keane to serve as Secretary of Defense in late 2016, though Keane declined the offer. Lai acknowledged this.

10:47 Break

10:35 Defense Concludes Examination; Prosecution to Begin Cross-Examination After Break

The defense asked Jimmy Lai if he had interacted with others during his imprisonment since April 2021. Lai stated that while on remand, his family visited him daily. When the defense clarified that they meant interactions within the prison, Lai replied that he mostly spent time in his cell praying and reading, with family visits being his only form of contact. He added that during remand, he could receive daily family visits, but after his conviction, family visits were limited to four times a month.

Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang questioned the relevance of this line of inquiry to the case. The defense explained that it pertained to Lai’s memory. Judge Lee noted that given the events occurred 3 to 4 years ago, the court understands if the defendant cannot recall certain details. The defense then indicated they would not pursue the matter further.

The defense asked whether Lai had agreed with others to engage in activities that endangered national security and whether he personally engaged in such activities. Lai denied all allegations. The defense presented a July 1, 2020, Apple Daily article discussing potential offenses under the National Security Law, including “collusion with foreign or external forces to endanger national security,” and asked if Lai had read the article at the time. Lai said he could not remember.

The defense concluded their examination, and representatives for the three Apple Daily-related companies stated they had no questions. After a short recess, the prosecution was set to begin its cross-examination.

10:25 Lai States He Had No Role in Apple Daily‘s Shutdown

The defense presented an article titled “Moral Suffocation Leading to an Ultimate Explosion” published on December 6, 2020, under Jimmy Lai’s name. Lai confirmed the article was written before his remand. The defense noted that the article concluded with the editorial comment, “This article was written by the author before being remanded.” Lai explained that he typically wrote articles in advance for colleagues to publish at an appropriate time.

The defense referred to a letter Lai had written to former Apple Daily editor-in-chief Ryan Law Wai-kwong, which was published by Apple Daily on April 13, 2021, under the title “Jimmy Lai’s Letter to the Apple Daily Family: A Time to Stand Tall in an Era of Decline.” The defense asked if Lai had requested its publication. Lai said he had not.

The defense outlined the timeline of Lai’s convictions, noting that he was sentenced on April 6, May 28, and December 13, 2021, for three unauthorized assembly cases, and on December 10, 2022, for a fraud case.

The defense pointed out that Lai began serving his sentence in April 2021, and Apple Daily ceased operations in June 2021. When asked if he had played any role in publishing articles at Apple Daily during his remand from December 3, 2020, until the newspaper’s shutdown, Lai stated he had no such role.

The defense presented a June 19, 2021, Apple Daily report mentioning the court appearance of Cheung Kim-hung and Ryan Law. The report included a message from Lai conveyed through a reporter after his wife’s visit: “I’m very proud of you. History will not forget you, the journalists. You bear the suffering of carrying the cross, but don’t be afraid!”

Lai explained that his colleagues were operating Apple Daily under pressure, which he described as “suffering,” likening it to the biblical reference of “bearing the cross.” The defense asked what Lai intended to convey. Lai said suffering often leads to emotional instability and fear, so he wanted to comfort his colleagues by saying, “Don’t be afraid.”

When asked if he was encouraging his colleagues to continue advocating for sanctions, Lai denied this, emphasizing that he advised them to be extremely cautious and avoid taking risks: “Don’t let your unstable psychological state frighten you.”

The defense questioned whether Lai had any role in the decision to shut down Apple Daily. Lai denied involvement, reiterating that the newspaper’s editorial operations were independent. When asked if colleagues had informed him about the shutdown, Lai said he did not recall anyone notifying him before the decision. He added that he believed the decision was made by the board of directors and speculated that he might have learned about it later from news reports or visitors.

According to records, on April 16, 2021, Lai was sentenced to 14 months in prison for his role in the August 18 Civil Human Rights Front “streamlined assembly” case and the August 31 assembly case. On May 28, 2021, Lai was sentenced to 14 months for the October 1 unauthorized assembly case, bringing the total sentence for these cases to 20 months. On December 13, 2021, Lai was sentenced to 13 months for incitement to participate in the unauthorized June 4, 2020, vigil. For the fraud case, Lai and Next Digital executive Wong Wai-keung were found guilty of concealing violations of the Tseung Kwan O Industrial Estate lease terms. Lai was sentenced to five years and nine months, while Wong received one year and nine months.

10:10 Lai Encouraged “Keep Fighting” While in Remand: Operating Apple Daily Was a Form of Fighting

The defense recounted the timeline of Jimmy Lai’s arrest and charges, noting that on December 2, 2020, Lai was charged with fraud when reporting to the police station and appeared in Magistrates’ Court the next day. Bail was denied, and Lai was remanded in custody. On December 11, he was additionally charged with collusion with foreign forces. He was granted bail under strict conditions by the High Court on December 23 but had his bail revoked by the Court of Final Appeal on December 31. Lai has remained in custody since. Lai confirmed these details.

The defense pointed out that while Lai previously testified that he had been in remand for four and a half years, the actual duration was four years and one month. Lai agreed.

The defense presented a December 5, 2020, Apple Daily report published two days after Lai’s remand, titled “Jimmy Lai: Have No Fear, Keep Fighting; Son Delivers Apple Daily But Correctional Service Rejects It.” The defense asked if Lai had conveyed messages to Apple Daily colleagues and readers through his lawyers. Lai said he believed so but could not recall when he mentioned such messages.

The defense cited the report, which stated:

“Jimmy Lai, accused of violating the Tseung Kwan O Industrial Estate land lease, has been unprecedentedly charged with conspiracy to commit fraud and unusually denied bail… Yesterday, he conveyed through friends and lawyers to Apple Daily colleagues and readers: ‘Have no fear, we have to fight on.’”

The defense asked if Lai had conveyed this message through his lawyers. Lai responded, “If it was reported, then I must have.”

The defense asked whether this message was intended for public release. Lai replied that he was unsure whether it was meant for publication and suggested it may have been to comfort and encourage colleagues. When pressed on why he used the phrase “keep fighting,” Lai explained:

“For Apple Daily at that time, to operate was almost the same as continuing to fight, because you were running the operation under the fear and risk of arrest. You had to keep fighting—that was fighting on.”

10: 08 Court in Session

The Witness