Gao Yunxiang walked out of court. (reporter / photo by the newspaper)
Female victims of Gao Yunxiang`s suspected sexual invasion case (hereinafter referred to as A),) may be summoned to court for cross-examination.
Today, the Gao Yunxiang case held a crucial hearing in Sydney Central District Court, in which the prosecution and defense engaged in a fierce verbal battle over whether A should testify in court. Defense lawyers questioned whether A would make false charges for "avoiding marital discord," and the prosecution added seven new charges against Gao Yunxiang. Gao Yunxiang appeared in court again on the same day, his wife Dong Xuan did not accompany in the side. Another defendant, Wang Jing, and A were not present. On the afternoon of Nov. 14, a judge will rule on whether A is required to appear in court.
At 09:25 today, Gao Yunxiang, dressed in a black suit and dark glasses, appeared outside court, looking serious. However, in the face of this more important hearing, Dong Xuan still did not attend. Another defendant, Wang Jing, did not appear in court by video.
At about 9.30 a.m., at the beginning of the trial, the prosecution first said it had added seven new charges against Gao Yunxiang and 13 new charges against Wang Jing, but did not know exactly what the charges were. Earlier, Western media revealed that the new charges were related to the illegal detention of A. around 10:00, the hearing briefly adjourned for half an hour.
After the reopening, the prosecution and defense filed a debate over the defence lawyer`s application in October. In previous court, defense lawyers filed 91 and 93 applications under the New State Criminal procedure Act (< Criminal Procedure Act). 91 applications were intended to summon witnesses to appear in court, while the more important 93 application was to summon A to appear for cross-examination.
Gao Yunxiang wore a black suit to answer the news, Dong Xuan did not accompany in the side. (reporter / photo by the newspaper)
In response, defense counsel Cohen (John Korn) said the application was based on inconsistencies or even "contradictions" between the two testimonies, and that A`s testimony ran counter to what had been recorded on CCTV surveillance footage.
In his first testimony to the police on 27 March, he stated that sexual behavior. Had not occurred in the hotel room However, in her third testimony on 28 March, she changed her claim that she was forced to perform sexual behavior. "this is no longer a matter of incoherence, inconsistency; it is completely contradictory." Cohen thinks.
Meanwhile, Cohen said A was very close to Wang Jing in his karaoke private room, according to CCTV surveillance footage on the night of the incident. After arriving outside Hotel Shangri La Santa Monica, A waved to the vehicle who wanted to take her away, which was also puzzling whether she was "forced". "it`s a very special case, and we`re just trying to figure out what we`re going to face in the next session." Cohen says.
The prosecution objected to the application for a subpoena A, arguing that blood and semen had been found in the hotel room, indicating that sexual behavior did exist. The prosecution said whether A had any previous intimacy with Wang had nothing to do with what happened in the room. "the intimate behavior of the victim and Wang did not prove that she agreed to sexual behavior with Gao Yunxiang," the prosecution said.
The judge said there were so many factors to consider in the case that the court did not make a decision. Next Wednesday, Nov. 14, the judge will make a final ruling on whether A is required to testify in court.
In response to the next move in the case, Tang Lin, a lawyer at Australian law firm Tang Lin, said that if the application for subpoena A was supported, the case would enter the pre-trial stage and the prosecution and defense would cross-examine the witness and A in court. If the application is unsuccessful, the pre-trial will not proceed, and the case will be referred to the District Court in a few weeks, with a 12-member jury set up in six to eight months for trial by the jury. It is worth mentioning that under the Australian judicial system, the jury will decide whether Gao Yunxiang is guilty, and only if he is found guilty by all 12 members can he be truly convicted.
