The Court of First Instance heard the final evidence in the case involving former junket mogul Alvin Chau and several other defendants concerning the former gaming promoter Suncity Group yesterday.
At the final hearing before the verdict, Chau called on the court to acquit all former Suncity workers accused of performing illegal gambling activities and of participating in a criminal organization, TDM Radio reported.
Some defendants, including Chau, decided to speak to the court one last time, insisting on their innocence. Chau also reaffirmed that he never practiced or promoted any side betting activities in local casinos.
The defense focused on the accusations of illicit exploitation of gambling activities in an authorized place, which relates to so-called phone betting. Most of the defense lawyers argued the point, asserting that the activity falls in a legal gray area, and that there is no legal basis to consider the activity a crime.
The defense also reminded the court of a statement by Judiciary Police investigators, which, they said, failed to clearly explain how the activity was illegal and which particular law was violated.
The defense put forward the same arguments concerning the crimes of founding, running, and being a member of a criminal organization, which they generally refuted. The defense noted that Suncity was a legal, registered company which was operating for over 10 years in the market without any reported issues, a fact echoed by Chau himself, who said that he failed to understand how such a reputable company could now be equated to a “gang.”
On a personal note Chau told the court that he would never commit such illegal acts for “so little”: he is accused of profiting by some 20 billion patacas which, according to the prosecution, was split among over 90 different companies.
Of the principal defendants, only Cheong Chi Kin, who is one of the two who has admitted to the accusations concerning side betting, said that he intends to compensate the government for the lost taxes. However, he maintains the assertion that side bets have always been common in Macau casinos and that he did not think they were illegal. Cheong said he assumed this because the side betting was done openly and never attracted any remarks, including from concessionaires and inspectors from the Gaming Inspection and Coordination Bureau.
Another matter which raised the eyebrows of the defense lawyers concerned the use of evidence provided by mainland authorities. One of the defense lawyers requested that this evidence be discarded, since local police had only access to parts of the evidence that was pre-selected by the mainland authorities and not the entire contents.
The court will reconvene on January 18 next year to publically deliver its verdict.
