紙盒藏屍案主角歐陽炳強因病過身　再度呼冤堅稱從冇殺人

覺得歐陽係無辜嘅大部份人係覺得警砌人生豬肉
班警仲收買法醫，唔知有冇收買陪審團啊

照你哋邏輯咁樣去諗唔知係咪收買唔到果個法證呢
二百幾條先驗到七條，不如講100條啦，咁樣咪唔使俾人爭論囉，亦都唔使驚陪審團有其他決定
（假設冇收埋陪審團）

警真on9
搞咁多大龍鳳
不如唔爭在收買埋科學鑑證條友啦
收買唔到都出黎講聲有人想比錢你造假啦

因為科學鑑證喺當時的香港係啱啱開始
法證唔識作囉
而家科技進步左咁多 又多左案例參考同經驗咪比人睇穿

咁你解唔解釋到點解一個死者被勒死的「兇案現場」搵唔到勒殺案應有的環境證據？
學你咁講 abcdefg加埋一齊的唯一合理推論 唔係警察造假 仲有咩可能性？
造假唔一定係指警方偽造證據
而係可能有d對歐陽有利的證據會幫佢脫罪 警方就隱瞞左
例如調查的過程搵到3個嫌疑人
但如果將所有證據放上庭
3個嫌疑人都好大機會無罪
所以警方揀左一個佢地認為最可疑的人黎搵證據砌佢 隱瞞左對另外2個嫌疑人不利的證據
咁就會造成一個不合理的結果(案情同證據唔吻合)

但係又好奇怪就係
你收買得法證去驗環境證據嘅灰塵結構，白油，
紙碎，字跡係吻口嘅同時，還掂全部都係嫁禍
科學鑑證果個位又唔屈盡啲。

陰謀論可以無限擴展
其實同呢班友討論都幾撚晒時日日

「因為科學鑑證喺當時的香港係啱啱開始
法證唔識作囉」
欣賞你咁多獨特而又夠主觀性嘅解釋
真心的 no offense

好撚顛

解釋唔到就陰謀論

其實嗰個年代的香港警察唔似得而家的香港警察咁誠實可靠
所以當d證據同案情唔合理到某個位的時候
必須考慮警察造假的可能性

警方要「快速破案」唔需要收賣法醫或者鑑證人員，因為所有經化驗嘅證物都係由佢哋搜集再交去法醫或者鑑證，只要警方搜證過程有偏頗就可以控制晒成個結果。

首次上訴時嘅法官都質疑過點解警方搜證時無用elimination method，例如搜埋個工場其它職員嘅衫做fibres對比，反而所有搜證化驗只係集中喺被告一人身上，仲要連個法醫都認為喺被告件西裝搵到同死者手指內相若嘅衣物fibres唔係獨特嘢嚟。

//Finally, a glaring omission on the part of those investigating the crime was that the clothing of other employees in the shop and workshop had not been analysed, the investigations having been focused exclusively upon the Appellant once he came under suspicion; there had been a failure to employ the elimination method and this in the face of Dr. Dailly's admission that the fibres in the appellant's suit were not unique.//


另一樣，首次原審時控方法醫曾經作供表示，如果被告有著過嗰件西裝去過個工場咁理論上就應該會有衣物fibres留喺現場，但佢哋檢驗過現場數以千計嘅fibres都搵唔到同件西裝相關，即係間接引證咗被告極可能從未著過件西裝返工。

控方成個案情主係依賴被告西裝上嗰兩條fibres同裝屍電視紙箱上嘅debris做circumstantial evidence，用嚟分別證明死者同被告有接觸過而個紙箱亦曾經喺個工場出場過。 當無法證明被告件西裝事發當晚喺工場出現過，咁現時嘅刑事準則成條chain of circumstantial evidence就斷晒，控方成個案情就唔再成立最多只係證明到死者同個紙箱有喺工場出現過。

//It was the doctor's evidence that if the suit had been worn in that workshop it was likely that some fibres therefrom would have remained in the workshop and this was the purpose of the minute but fruitless examination of the hundreds of thousands of fibres found there; this should have been pointed out to the jury as corroborative of the Appellant's assertion in evidence that he had never worn that suit to work.//

咁多年嚟有咁多法律界有頭有面嘅人都話呢單係冤案唔係陰謀論咁簡單，而係單案係法律上有太多漏洞。

不如你花少少時問認真睇晒兩份judgement先再話對呢單案有質疑係建基於陰謀論啦

邊個講過死者手臂上張紙候嘅字跡吻合啊?
明明係張紙細到連字跡都驗唔到又何來字跡吻合??玩陰謀論嗰個似係你哋喎

//Some handwriting on a small piece of paper adhering to the arm of the deceased was not that of any employee of the Americana Shop the evidence that the handwriting simply was too small for effective comparison so that the result was not that employees of the shop had been eliminated but that no effective test in respect of them could be made.//

樓主po完話人唔睇
我睇完仲多問號
咁都叫報告真係求鳩其其
尤其綠色纖維嗰句"The chemist was of opinion that they all came from the same source."

屌你

覆錯咗 #438

真。所以
多數藍屍
會認為歐陽炳強係真兇

law嘅嘢我就唔多識，但會唔會opinion只係法庭用語，judgement都唔係一份report 黎

點解排除警察造假的可能性？ 因為屈得唔夠盡
情況就好似警察話喺你身上搵到包毒品 但包毒品冇你指紋
然後你話警察屈你
佢就話要屈的話點解警察唔喺包毒品上面印上你的指紋？
既然警察冇咁做 代表警察唔係屈你 包毒品的確係喺你身上搵到

有冇諗過胡鴻烈根本都諗唔到其他辯護理由去幫歐陽炳強？所以佢咪打好人牌希望陪審團放佢囉。又或者根本胡鴻烈都知道其實係好大機會歐陽就係兇手，咁當所有證據都顯示佢就係兇手嘅時候，你仲有啲咩嘢可以幫佢辯護？自己都說服唔到自己，點說服陪審團。

明明胡鴻烈係相信佢係無辜

而且如果係佢係勒死條女既話 條女冇乜可能冇爭扎
而家死者同被告都冇乜爭扎過既跡象

你講嗰個「小醉俠」 50年前有份喺現場搜證同親手做埋鑑證?
唔係嘅話點解佢所講嘅三手資料會有參考價值過法庭上嘅官方紀錄嘅??

唔通話唔信佢係蘑菇？

小醉俠佢講嘢似信歐陽炳強係無辜，佢做幾日開live話覺得TVB個英文節目係特登做佢，仲要段片cut頭cut 尾唔覺得小醉俠覺得佢係有罪

佢做辯方都唔信個客，下次仲有人搵佢打官司？

胡鴻烈話相信佢係無辜=唔通話唔信佢係蘑菇？
胡鴻烈話佢唔係無辜=佢真係唔係無辜
結論：胡鴻烈冇可能相信佢係無辜