Jimmy Lai’s trial is happening now. Follow the latest updates.

Show your support by using the hashtag #FreeJimmyLai

Day 126: February 3, 2025

The Witness: Live Updates | Jimmy Lai’s Trial Day 126: Prosecution Accuses Lai of Using Granddaughter’s Birth to Seek U.S. Travel While on Bail; Lai Denies Hiding Meetings

After a New Year recess, the trial of Next Digital founder Jimmy Lai resumed Monday at the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts, which is temporarily serving as the High Court. Lai faces charges including “conspiracy to collude with foreign forces.”

Monday marked the 126th day of the trial, Lai’s 34th day of testimony, and the prosecution’s eighth day of cross-examination. Prosecutors referenced Lai’s criminal intimidation case, in which he was accused of threatening an Oriental Daily journalist in 2017. He was granted bail in May 2020.

Lai later applied for a bail variation to travel to the United States to visit his newborn granddaughter, citing his daughter’s recent childbirth. However, the court denied his request.

Prosecutors presented mobile phone messages indicating that Lai’s aide, Mark Simon, had been arranging meetings for him with then-U.S. Vice President Mike Pence and others. In one message, Lai wrote:

“Her [granddaughter’s] birth certificate should be ready in about a week… It’s good protection at this time of crisis.”

Prosecutors questioned whether Lai concealed his real reason for seeking a bail variation—meeting U.S. officials—while using his granddaughter’s birth as a pretext. Lai denied this, insisting he genuinely wanted to see his granddaughter and did not consider meeting U.S. lawmakers a significant issue at the time.

The case is being heard by High Court-designated National Security Law judges Esther Toh Lye-ping, Susana Maria D’Almada Remedios, and Alex Lee Wan-tang.

The prosecution is represented by Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions (Special Duties) 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

16:30 Court Adjourns

16:10 Lai: Believed Chan Tsz-wah Was a Conservative Within the Valiant Camp

Regarding his knowledge of co-defendant Chan Tsz-wah, Jimmy Lai stated that he was aware that Martin Lee had approached Mark Simon for assistance with a bridge loan, but at the time, he did not know Chan Tsz-wah personally.

The prosecution presented a WhatsApp group chat that included Lai, Mark Simon, and Martin Lee. On September 23, 2019, Martin Lee messaged:

“What about Anson and Wayland?”

Lai then asked who Wayland was, to which Mark Simon replied:

“He is the young man who is leading up the international newspaper campaigns. He is a very capable guy, but he likes to work behind the scenes.”

The prosecution asked whether Chan Tsz-wah had already been linked to the international newspaper campaigns at that time. Lai said that he believed this was mentioned during his first meeting with Chan, though he could not recall whether it was Chan or Martin Lee who had said it.

The prosecution then displayed a check for HK$144,000 made out to Chan Tsz-wah. Lai stated that this was likely a sponsorship for a newspaper exhibition at Mark Simon’s request, but he could not remember clearly.

The prosecution asked whether Chan was a conservative. Lai responded that this was how Martin Lee had introduced Chan to him, describing him as a “conservative within the valiant camp,” capable of calming down violent actions among the more radical factions.

The prosecution pointed to Chan Tsz-wah’s testimony, which stated that Lai had asked him to contact “valiant camp” leaders. Lai clarified that he had asked Chan to speak with valiant leaders and emphasized that Chan was one of the less violent members within the group.

Judge Susana Maria D’Almada Remedios repeatedly questioned whether Chan, as a “conservative” within the valiant camp, was still violent. Lai responded that not all members of the valiant camp were violent, and some were more conservative.

Judge Esther Toh Lye-ping then asked whether Lai had believed at the time that Chan was still violent. Lai replied that if Chan had been violent, Martin Lee would not have introduced him as someone who could help de-escalate violence within the valiant camp.

15:50 Lai Says He Did Not Pay Attention to Third Crowdfunded Advertisement, Only Provided Loan

The prosecution focused on the August 2019 third round of crowdfunded newspaper advertisements under the “G20 x Lam Chau Team” initiative. The prosecution noted that Lai had advanced HK$3.5 million and that Apple Daily had published the campaign, which was related to the anti-extradition bill protests. Lai acknowledged that Apple Daily had reported on the campaign.

The prosecution pointed out that in July 2019, before the advertisement campaign, Lai had traveled to the U.S. and met with then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. The prosecution asked whether Lai had requested sanctions against Chinese and Hong Kong officials at that time. Lai responded that he had discussed sanctions related to Chinese officials’ corrupt funds but had not mentioned Hong Kong officials.

The prosecution then asked whether Lai was aware of the contents of the advertisement campaign in August 2019. Lai denied this. When asked whether he had participated in the advertisement campaign, Lai said that he had only provided a loan.

The prosecution further questioned whether Lai agreed with the content of the advertisements. Lai responded that he had no involvement and did not care about it. However, the prosecution noted that Lai was aware the campaign was linked to the “Fight for Freedom Group.” Lai confirmed this.

The prosecution then cited a September 23, 2019 message from Mark Simon to Lai:

“Senator Scott is coming, as you know. But now he wants to see you in person Sunday afternoon, the 29th, for a one-on-one.”

The prosecution claimed that Mark Simon had arranged for Lai to meet with U.S. Senator Rick Scott. Lai responded that the meeting had been suggested by former U.S. Consul General to Hong Kong and Macau, Hanscom Smith, and later arranged by Mark Simon, rather than being initiated by himself.

The prosecution then asserted that Lai had personally requested the meeting, with Mark Simon merely reporting back to him. Lai reiterated that Mark Simon had only informed him and that it was Rick Scott who had expressed a desire to meet with young people, not a meeting that Lai had instructed Mark Simon to arrange.

15:23 Break

15:10 Lai Agrees That Mark Simon Was His Intermediary with “Fight For Freedom” Group

The prosecution presented a conversation from August 17, 2019, between Jimmy Lai and Mark Simon, in which Lai asked:

“Mark, When was the day they raised crowdfunding? Their purpose is for advertising for what? Thanks. Jimmy.”

Mark Simon replied:

“They raised the money Monday the 12th. The purpose of the money is to place advertisements in major news organizations and online around the world. For example, The New York Times, The Australian.”

The prosecution suggested that Simon’s response should have made it clear to Lai that these international advertisements were a form of political propaganda. Lai responded that he was only concerned with the bridge loan to fund advertisements in order to gain international support for the 2019 movement.

The prosecution then presented a New York Times advertisement, which contained slogans such as “CATCH HONG KONG AS WE FALL” and “THE LAST STAND FOR FREEDOM.” The ad also included a call to action:

“Contact your Senators and Representatives to support or become a co-sponsor to the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act and to support the introduction of legislation to suspend the U.S. sales of ammunition and other crowd control equipment to the Hong Kong police.”

The prosecution pointed out that on August 20, 2019, Apple Daily published a report titled “Hongkongers’ Fight Against Bullets Featured in 10 Countries’ Newspapers,” covering the international ad campaign. Lai stated that he did not recall reading the article nor had he seen the content of the New York Times advertisement.

The prosecution asserted that Mark Simon acted as Lai’s intermediary with the “Fight For Freedom” group and represented Lai’s interests. Lai agreed.

14:52 Prosecution Asks if “SWHK” Is Linked to Hong Kong Independence; Lai: Mark Simon Would Have Pointed It Out If It Were

The prosecution questioned Jimmy Lai about his connections with co-defendant Chan Tsz-wah and the group “SWHK” (Fight for Freedom. Stand with Hong Kong).

The prosecution presented a June 26, 2019 conversation between Lai and Mark Simon, in which Simon wrote:

“Jimmy, I just heard from Martin. The fundraising for the newspaper has one problem. They can’t have access to all the funds until July 2. As such, Martin is asking if we can do a bridge loan of Hong Kong dollar 5 million to the group. We would get our money back by July 4th.”

The next day, Mark Simon emailed Next Digital’s Chief Operating Officer and then-Chief Financial Officer Royston Chow, stating:

“Guys, can you inform them that they have credit for one week and so we will run the ad? And they can pay us within one week. Mr. Lai has approved assisting as they are having trouble moving their money.”

Lai confirmed that he had previously testified he was willing to lend HK$5 million for international newspaper advertisements. However, he stated that he had not seen the above email and that Mark Simon did not need his approval to issue the loan.

The prosecution then presented a conversation from August 12, 2019, in which Mark Simon told Lai:

“Also, the Fight for Freedom Group, the ones we helped with international ads last time, has paid us back in full. They are now doing another ad campaign and may need bridge loans/guarantees from us again. Is it okay?”

Mark Simon also sent a screenshot from a crowdfunding website, stating:

“This is their CrowdSource. They have raised USD $884,000 in less than two hours.”

The prosecution pointed out that the image showed the “SWHK” logo and asked whether Mark Simon had explained to Lai that it was the “SWHK” emblem. Lai said no.

The prosecution then asked if Mark Simon had ever told him that “Fight for Freedom Group” was the same as “SWHK”. Lai said no, stating that Mark Simon had only referred to the group as “Fight for Freedom” in crowdfunding efforts.

When asked whether Lai had inquired about who was in the group, Lai said he had not, explaining that since Martin Lee had introduced the group, he had not asked for further details.

The prosecution then asked whether Lai knew that “SWHK” was linked to Hong Kong independence. Lai responded that if the group had been associated with independence, Mark Simon would have pointed it out, as Simon knew that Lai opposed Hong Kong independence.

14:33 Lai Denies Seeking Sanctions Through Foreign Contacts

The prosecution continued questioning Jimmy Lai regarding his foreign connections, stating that between 2019 and 2020, Lai communicated with various foreign figures, including senior officials, senators, and congressmen, through Mark Simon. The prosecution alleged that Lai’s intention was to push for sanctions and hostile actions against China and Hong Kong. Lai denied this.

The prosecution then listed former U.S. Army Vice Chief of Staff Jack Keane, former U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, former U.S. Consul General to Hong Kong James Cunningham, and former senior State Department adviser Christian Whiton as part of Lai’s network. Lai confirmed that he had maintained contact with them. The prosecution also asked whether Lai was in contact with Mary Kissel, a former aide to then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Lai denied this, stating that only Mark Simon relayed messages from Kissel to him.

The prosecution suggested that these foreign contacts were “behind-the-scenes figures” (“枱底人”). Lai disagreed, stating that they were all publicly known figures (“枱面人”). The prosecution again accused Lai of using these foreign contacts to push for sanctions and hostile actions against China and Hong Kong. Lai responded that not all situations were the same, reiterating that any mention of sanctions was specifically related to corrupt officials.

Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang noted that the prosecution’s questioning spanned 2019 to 2020, but Hong Kong’s legal landscape changed in July 2020 with the enactment of the National Security Law (NSL). The prosecution rephrased its question, asking whether before July 2020, Lai had used foreign contacts to push for sanctions and hostile actions against China and Hong Kong. Lai denied this, stating that while he had called for sanctions in his articles, he had not directly requested sanctions from foreign officials.

The prosecution then asked whether, after the NSL took effect, Lai continued using his foreign contacts to push for sanctions and hostile actions against China and Hong Kong. Lai denied this.

The prosecution specifically inquired whether Lai had discussed sanctions with then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Lai denied this, saying he had only raised the issue of freezing the bank accounts of corrupt officials.

Judge Susana Maria D’Almada Remedios questioned this, noting that Lai had previously testified that freezing bank accounts was a form of sanction. Lai responded, “Okay.”

The prosecution further asked whether before the NSL was enacted, Lai was aware that senior U.S. officials were closely monitoring his articles, speeches, and interviews. Lai replied that he did not know whether they were closely monitoring, but he knew that they were aware of his articles in publications like The New York Times.

The prosecution then stated that U.S. officials had indeed paid attention to Lai’s articles in The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal. Lai confirmed this. The prosecution pressed further, alleging that Lai used his articles and interviews to call on foreign countries to impose sanctions and take hostile actions against China and Hong Kong. Lai disagreed.

The prosecution then claimed that after the NSL was enacted, Lai continued to instruct Mark Simon to arrange interviews with foreign media. Lai denied this, saying that foreign media reached out to Mark Simon, who then relayed the interview requests to him.

The prosecution further pressed Lai, alleging that through these interviews, he intended to push foreign countries to impose sanctions and take hostile actions against China and Hong Kong. Lai denied this.

Referring to Lai’s previous claim that he had never met Sunny Cheung in the U.S., the prosecution cited a report from Apple Daily on October 22, 2019, which stated that upon arriving in Washington, Lai met with Hong Kong Democracy Council (HKDC) director Samuel Chu Muk-man and Sunny Cheung, as well as senators.

Lai responded that he did not recall meeting Cheung in the U.S., suggesting that he might have misremembered, or the report might have been incorrect.

12:44 Lunch

12:30 Prosecution Questions Why Lai Did Not Seek to Withdraw Sanctions List After National Security Law

Judge Susana Maria D’Almada Remedios pressed Lai on why he had asked Mark Simon about Chinese officials. Lai explained that because they were high-ranking officials, he suspected the reports were fake news and therefore sought clarification from Simon.

The prosecution asked whether Lai was satisfied as long as Hong Kong officials were on the sanctions list. Lai denied this. The prosecution noted that Lai had consistently sought international support and asked how he could be certain the officials on the list were related to the National Security Law (NSL) if he did not know who they were. Lai responded that he had never specified that the officials must be linked to the NSL.

The prosecution further pointed out that at the end of May 2020, Lai repeatedly mentioned sanctioning Chinese officials, freezing their accounts, and targeting corruption funds. Lai acknowledged that this was his suggestion. The prosecution asked whether Lai had instructed Mark Simon to convey this idea to the U.S.. Lai said he had not and that this was not Simon’s responsibility, though he confirmed that he wanted to stop the implementation of the NSL at the time.

The prosecution asked whether Lai believed sanctioning these officials was a way to punish Chinese and Hong Kong officials to block the NSL. Lai denied this, stating that he had never mentioned “punishment.”

Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang then asked whether Lai wanted to ensure that the individuals on the sanctions list were the correct targets. Lai said he did not know who the correct targets were.

Judge Susana Maria D’Almada Remedios followed up, asking whether Mark Simon acted on Lai’s behalf, including external communications. Lai acknowledged that he accepted the outcomes of Simon’s actions.

Judge D’Almada Remedios further questioned whether external communications included proposing the addition of Hong Kong officials to the sanctions list, which Lai accepted. Lai confirmed this.

The prosecution then asked whether Lai was aware that the NSL was about to be implemented while Mark Simon was advocating sanctions on Hong Kong officials. Lai confirmed this.

The prosecution pressed further, asking whether Lai had sought to withdraw the sanctions list on Hong Kong officials after the NSL took effect. Lai responded that he had not.

Lai then attempted to explain why he had not withdrawn the list, but Judge Esther Toh Lye-ping interrupted him. When Lai attempted to continue, Judge Toh raised her voice, emphasizing that the defense could raise follow-up questions later, but at this moment, Lai needed to answer only the prosecution’s questions.

As Lai tried once more to explain, Judge Toh cut him off again, saying:

“No! No! You understand the word ‘No’? Just sit and listen to the question.”

The prosecution continued, citing a June 1, 2020, message from Mark Simon:

“By the way, Paul is trying to help on two fronts. He is submitting articles to various publications. For example, he submitted one to the WSJ that was rejected, and now he has another one that he is shopping around.

He’s also talking with the NSC about targeted sanctions on mainland Chinese leaders. In particular, he wants to open up their bank accounts—by that, I mean he wants them to be looked at on corruption charges.”

The prosecution asked whether Lai had told Mark Simon or former U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz to stop taking action after the NSL took effect.

Lai responded that after the NSL came into force, everything discussed before had “become obsolete”, saying: “So why should I do anything redundant?”

12:17 Messages Show Mark Simon Mentioned Hong Kong Officials to U.S. National Security Council; Lai: Trusted His Judgment, Did Not Inquire About Details

The prosecution pointed out that Jimmy Lai had testified that Mark Simon sometimes acted on his behalf or worked for him, including arranging meetings with the U.S. government and communicating with National Security Council (NSC) members. Lai claimed he did not know how Mark Simon communicated with others, only that Simon would report back to him afterward.

The prosecution then presented a conversation between Lai and Mark Simon on June 23, 2020:

Lai:

“The sanction list of China top officials Wong Yang and Hang Zheng and the claim of their corrupt money—is this fake news or corroborated one? Can you check? Thanks. Jimmy.”

Mark Simon:

“Checking now. Fake news, for now. Wong & Hang are on several lists that HK activist groups have turned in. But our friend at State said she will find out how narrow the list has become. When in DC last week, list ideas were discussed. I have put forward only HK officials, as someone else was asked to do China for consideration by NSC.”

The prosecution asked what “Hong Kong activist groups” and the submitted lists referred to. Lai said he did not know and had not inquired. The prosecution then asked which Hong Kong officials Mark Simon had put forward. Lai again said he did not know.

The prosecution asked whether Mark Simon was acting on Lai’s behalf when submitting the list. Lai responded that what Mark Simon said and did did not necessarily represent him entirely.

Judge Esther Toh Lye-ping asked why Lai had not asked Mark Simon which Hong Kong officials were on the list. Lai explained that he was not in the habit of questioning everything and that the information Simon provided was sufficient.

Judge Susana Maria D’Almada Remedios then asked whether Lai trusted Mark Simon’s judgment and had confidence in the officials Simon proposed for sanctions. Lai replied that he generally had confidence in Simon’s judgment but reiterated that he did not know which names had been submitted.

11:32 Break

11:18 Lai Agrees Meeting Pence After National Security Law Was “Stupid” but Emphasizes It Was Only Negligence

The prosecution presented a message from May 27, 2020, in which Mark Simon informed Jimmy Lai:

“Jimmy, NYT Editorial page called over & then sent an email they would like a 600-700 word piece on the implications of the National Security law as well as a few personal notables on your situation, especially the threat by Global Times to accuse you of subversion.”

On the same day, Lai responded to Simon:

“Mark, Please see whether this works. Thanks. Jimmy. Please tell Bill that in this time of crisis his help is invaluable not just to me but to HK, too. Thanks.”

The prosecution asked whether the “time of crisis” Lai referred to was the same as in his previous messages, meaning the enactment or impending implementation of the National Security Law (NSL). Lai denied this, saying he did not associate the crisis with the NSL.

Judge Susana Maria D’Almada Remedios asked whether Lai had intentionally concealed from the court his plan to meet U.S. officials. Lai denied this, stating that meeting U.S. lawmakers was not a crime and adding:

“I was carefree about it. I just don’t think it’s a big deal.”

The prosecution asked whether Lai knew that the “5.28 Decision” (Beijing’s May 28, 2020, resolution to impose the NSL) had already been passed. Lai confirmed. The prosecution then pointed out that Lai planned to arrive in the U.S. on July 4, 2020, when the NSL had already taken effect. Lai agreed, describing it as a “negligence” because they had forgotten about it.

The prosecution argued that this contradicted Lai’s claim of being cautious. Lai countered that overlooking the 5.28 Decision did not mean he was violating the law.

The prosecution further claimed that Lai knowingly planned to lobby in the U.S. despite the NSL’s enactment. Lai denied this, insisting it was merely negligence and that he did not discuss sanctions. However, he admitted that meeting Pence after the NSL’s implementation was “stupid.”

The prosecution asserted that Lai continued lobbying for sanctions and hostile actions against China and Hong Kong even as the NSL approached. Lai acknowledged the NSL was imminent but said he had overlooked its implications.

The prosecution then presented a conversation from June 12, 2020, in which Lai informed Simon:

“Mark, I’m sure you know already. I was refused by the court to travel. Sorry. Jimmy.”

Simon replied:

“Yes, I’m sorry about that. I just pulled in from two days in Washington. I saw the guys at the NSC, as well as have breakfast with Mary, and then I had some meetings on Capitol Hill. I’ll have a cuppa tea and then I will write you a report very quickly.”

Lai confirmed that “Mary” referred to Mary Kissel, a senior adviser to then Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, but said he did not remember what the report was about.

The next day, Mark Simon messaged Lai again:

“Just FYI, today I have fielded about 12 calls from everyone from the NSC staff to State Department desk officers, and people on Capitol Hill as well as journalist friends checking on you. Disappointment that you wouldn’t be coming, but also quite concerned about your well-being.”

The prosecution asked whether every NSC staff member wanted Lai to travel to the U.S. in July. Lai responded that the message did not say that every NSC official wanted him to come—only that they expressed concern.

The prosecution then asked why Lai wanted to meet officials from the NSC and the State Department. Lai responded that he hoped they would support Hong Kong, but denied that he was lobbying them.

The prosecution accused Lai of lobbying the U.S. to impose punitive measures. Lai denied this, saying, “I did not say that. I only said support Hong Kong.”

The prosecution pressed further, suggesting Lai specifically lobbied for sanctions against Chinese and Hong Kong officials. Lai denied this again, stating:

“That’s what you said. I did not say it.”

11:05 Lai Denies Intentionally Concealing Plans to Meet U.S. Officials from the Court

Regarding Lai’s message:

“Mark, Jade (Lai’s daughter) gave birth to this beautiful fat baby girl yesterday. Her birth certificate should be here in a week or so. So if I fly to NY and spend 14 days quarantine I should be able to have lunch at around June 20 or so. I hope is reinstated. It’s good protection at this time of crisis, hopefully see the big boss, too. Thanks.”

The prosecution asked whether Lai considered his granddaughter’s birth certificate a protective cover to facilitate his trip to meet with the U.S. government. Lai denied this, stating that his remark about “protection” might have referred to protecting Hong Kong during a time of crisis, emphasizing that the “crisis” referred to Hong Kong’s situation.

The prosecution then asked whether the “big boss” mentioned in the message referred to Mike Pence. Lai denied this, saying, “How could he be my big boss?”

The prosecution pressed further, suggesting that Lai used his granddaughter’s birth as a cover-up to apply for U.S. travel. Lai denied the claim, reiterating that he was referring to protecting Hong Kong during the crisis. The prosecution argued that obtaining his granddaughter’s birth certificate would have made his departure application legitimate and provided him with protection amid the crisis. Lai responded that the prosecution was mixing up different messages.

Judge Esther Toh Lye-ping asked whether Lai needed protection. Lai replied, “No.” Judge Toh followed up, asking whether this was because he was facing a crisis. Lai responded, “I was not facing a crisis. Hong Kong was facing a crisis.”

Judge Susana Maria D’Almada Remedios questioned why Lai did not mention plans to meet with U.S. officials when applying for bail variation. Lai replied that he had sufficient reasons to travel to the U.S. at the time, adding that no one was concerned about the National Security Law (NSL) then, saying: “I am just sitting here under NSL.”

Judge Susana Maria D’Almada Remedios asked whether meeting U.S. officials was Lai’s primary purpose for traveling to the U.S.. Lai denied this, stating that his main purpose was to see his granddaughter.

The judge pressed further, saying that Lai’s real primary objective was to meet U.S. officials. Lai responded, “That’s your statement,” and pointed out that his message explicitly stated, “I’m eager to see my granddaughter.”

The prosecution insisted that Lai’s top priority was meeting U.S. officials. Lai denied this. The prosecution argued that the context of his messages suggested otherwise. Lai responded, “That’s your context.”

The prosecution concluded that Lai intentionally concealed his plans to meet U.S. government officials from the court. Lai denied this, saying that meeting U.S. lawmakers was not a big deal.

10:45 Prosecution Alleges Lai Used Granddaughter Visit as Pretext for Bail Variation to Travel to the U.S.; Court Questions Possible Omission in Bail Application

The prosecution referenced Jimmy Lai’s criminal intimidation case, noting that he was granted bail on May 5, 2020, under the condition that he was not allowed to leave Hong Kong. According to reports, Lai had been accused of criminally intimidating an Oriental Daily journalist in 2017 but was ultimately acquitted.

The prosecution presented a message between Lai and Mark Simon on May 5, 2020, in which Lai wrote:

“Mark, The court ruled that I’m not allowed to leave HK while the case is ongoing and need to report to police every week on Wednesday. The second court appearance is scheduled on August 19-21. That means I won’t be able to have Lunch in June and won’t be able to go to Taipei before Sept. Thanks. Jimmy.”

The prosecution asked whether Lai had applied to the High Court for permission to leave Hong Kong specifically for his planned July trip to the U.S.. Lai responded that he had entrusted his lawyers with handling the matter and was not aware of the details. He recalled that one of his applications to travel to the U.S. was due to the birth of his daughter’s child.

Judge Esther Toh Lye-ping asked whether Lai applied to travel to the U.S. to see his granddaughter. Lai agreed.

The prosecution pointed out that in his court submission for bail variation, Lai cited several reasons for traveling to the U.S.: his daughter’s childbirth in New York, discussions on business plans, meetings with Apple Daily service providers, and talks on a hotel acquisition. However, the application did not mention meetings with the U.S. government or Vice President Mike Pence. The prosecution asked whether Lai had known at the time about the planned July meeting with the U.S. government. Lai said he did not remember.

Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang then asked: “Looking at this, visiting your granddaughter was not the primary reason for your trip to the U.S., was it?” Lai responded, “That was the main reason for my trip.”

The prosecution then presented a conversation between Lai and Mark Simon on May 22, 2020, in which Lai wrote:

“OK. I’ll try. First I’ve to get my granddaughter’s birth certificate to make my application legitimate. I hope my daughter will give birth in the next few days so I can be sure of the date of my trip to US. Thanks. Jimmy. If I apply for trip to US, can you reinstate the date of lunch in New York? So I’ve to quarantine 14 days upon arrival to US? If so once you set the lunch date I’ll come for quarantine. Thanks. Jimmy.”

On May 27, 2020, Lai sent another message to Mark Simon:

“Mark, Jade gave birth to this beautiful fat baby girl yesterday. Her birth certificate should be here in a week or so. So if I fly to NY and spend 14 days quarantine I should be able to have lunch at around June 20 or so. I hope is reinstated. It’s good protection at this time of crisis, hopefully see the big boss, too. Thanks. Jimmy.”

The prosecution was about to question Lai when Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang interrupted, asking whether the prosecution needed to issue a warning to the witness before proceeding. Judge Esther Toh Lye-ping asked whether the defense objected. The defense stated that a warning was unnecessary.

Judge Lee noted, however, that Lai’s statements in court and in his bail variation application might not reflect the true reason for his U.S. trip, saying:

“But that it may carry the implication that what he had told the court, and in fact he had told me in the bail variation, may not be the genuine reason.”

The prosecution then asked whether Lai had used his daughter’s childbirth as a pretext to apply for U.S. travel. Lai denied this, responding:

“I had to go to see her. I wanted to go to see her anyway.”

10:25 Lai Confirms U.S. Government Expressed Interest in Meeting in February 2020

The prosecution presented earlier messages between Jimmy Lai and Mark Simon from February 2020. In one of them, Simon wrote:

“VP Pence and senior staff read your piece in WSJ. NSC staff told me Friday when I spoke with them in follow-up to a meeting several days earlier. They are anxious to see you when here.”

The prosecution asked whether the U.S. government had already expressed interest in meeting Lai as early as February 2020. Lai confirmed this.

The prosecution cited the article referenced in the message, titled “China’s Facade of Stability,” and proceeded to highlight another conversation between Lai and Mark Simon on June 8, 2020. The messages indicated that Simon had purchased multiple plane tickets for Lai, including one for July 4, departing from Buffalo Niagara International Airport to Washington, D.C.

The prosecution asked if Lai was planning to meet with U.S. government officials. Lai confirmed this.

10:15 Prosecution Questions Lai on Plans to Meet Pence in May 2020 – Lai: Mark Simon Took the Initiative

Messages from the WhatsApp group “DCDems” revealed that Lai’s aide, Mark Simon, responded:

“I’m going to be in DC tomorrow and then next week again. I’ll be seeing folks on the Democratic side of the House and Senate. Also stopping by to see a few of our old friends and the administration.”

Simon also mentioned he would “keep trying.” The prosecution asked what he was trying to do. Lai said he did not know. The prosecution pressed further, asking whether it was lobbying for support for Hong Kong democracy. Lai reiterated that he did not know.

The prosecution then cited conversations between Lai and Mark Simon on May 30 and 31, 2020:

Lai: “Ok. Thanks. Now America still has no quarantine requirements, we should arrange lunch and other events as soon as possible. Thanks. Jimmy.”

Mark Simon: “Jimmy, US has no quarantine requirements, but US government & Congress does. Any meetings at WH have to get cleared and that will mean some delay and testing, as I just went through. Also, few members of Congress in town. Hopefully, we will see them back on June 15th. Do you have dates yet?”

The prosecution asked if Lai was planning to depart for the U.S. again on May 30, 2020. Lai said he did not remember.

The prosecution then displayed another message from Mark Simon:

“OK, there’s no member of Congress in town right now, but all the senior staff are here, as well as the NSC people, and of course the State Department. Once we got approximate dates, we will go to Pence. So, if they are taking meetings, we should have no problem. Was what I was told Wednesday.”

The prosecution asked whether Lai was planning to meet with U.S. government officials, including then-Vice President Mike Pence. Lai stated that this was what Mark Simon had told him.

Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang then inquired whether Mark Simon had been trying to arrange meetings in the U.S. for Lai. Lai confirmed this. Judge Lee further asked whether Simon was acting under Lai’s instructions. Lai denied this, stating that Mark Simon had taken the initiative on his own.

10:10 Prosecution Questions Lai on Communications with Former U.S. Officials

Prosecutor Anthony Chau Tin-hang continued his cross-examination of Jimmy Lai, citing discussions in the WhatsApp group “DCDems,” which included Lai, former U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, and former U.S. Consul General to Hong Kong James Cunningham.

On June 4, 2020, Mark Simon sent a message to the group, referencing information from a friend in Taiwan who was close to then-Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen:

“I’m summarising the point given by the national security advisor to VP Joe Biden under the Obama administration. Jake Sullivan, and a liberal scholar at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI)… To deal with a rising China, the Democrats want to take a multilateral approach to reach consensus among U.S. allies.”

The prosecution asked whether the friend mentioned in the message was Chiang Chun-nan, whom Lai had previously described as Tsai’s “trusted aide.” Lai responded that he did not know if it was Chiang, as there were other individuals close to Tsai as well.

The prosecution further pointed out that Lai had previously testified that the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) was a think tank and that Paul Wolfowitz was one of its members. Lai confirmed this but stated that he had no connection to the think tank.

The prosecution then cited another message:

“If Biden wins 2020, the US may resume the Obama doctrine which has been useless to contain China’s aggression at the cost of Taiwan.”

The prosecution suggested that the message implied Biden’s team was uninterested in curbing China’s aggression. Lai responded, “as the message states.”

The prosecution further cited Lai’s reply in the chat:

“We can’t take side political for HK’s good. But the Democracy’s stand doesn’t seem to click. Anyway we’ll comply with their stand and get the best out of it.”

The prosecution argued that Lai seemed to believe the U.S. Democratic Party was uninterested in Hong Kong affairs. Lai denied this, clarifying that he merely felt their views differed from his and were unhelpful in supporting Hong Kong.

The Witness

Stand up for Jimmy Lai

In a democracy, every voice matters. Click below to add your voice and share this message.

#FreeJimmyLai

#FreeJimmyLai

#FreeJimmyLai

#FreeJimmyLai