Care home supervisor denies raping resident five times
HK01 · 3 SOURCESabout 3 hours ago2 MIN
Summary
A former assistant hostel supervisor at a Hong Kong care home run by Hong Chi Association is standing trial in the High Court on five rape charges involving a female resident identified as X. The prosecution says Chung Pui-kei raped X on five occasions between July 13 and August 9 or 10, 2024, at a hostel in Tai Po, and relied on corridor CCTV footage and forensic testing of a bed sheet. A government chemist told the court a semen stain on X’s bed sheet contained the defendant’s semen and X’s DNA, a pattern consistent with semen flowing from the vagina after intercourse, though testing could not determine exactly how the stain was created. Giving evidence in his own defence, Chung denied raping X and said the stain was caused when he sat on her bed in shorts while sweating heavily, adding that he had not ejaculated.
Key Points
- Defendant Chung Pui-kei, 38 when charged, faces five rape counts alleging he assaulted X at a Tai Po hostel on July 13, 21, 28, August 3 and around August 9 to 10, 2024.
- Prosecutors played corridor CCTV showing X following Chung into a male staff room, while Chung was seen changing shoes, removing socks, and leaving with his clothes less tidy.
- On July 13, Chung entered wearing blue sports shoes and later left in slippers; on July 21 he entered in white socks but came out without them
- Government chemist Dr Lai Yau-chi said the bed sheet from X’s room carried a semen stain containing Chung’s semen and X’s DNA after profiling tests.
- Under cross-examination, Chung said he agreed to be X’s boyfriend to give her “hope” and a fantasy, and denied all prosecution claims of non-consensual sex.
Why It Matters
The case is being closely watched because it concerns alleged sexual abuse inside a residential facility for people with disabilities, where residents depend heavily on staff for daily care and supervision. The evidence dispute also shows how Hong Kong courts weigh CCTV behaviour, forensic science and a defendant’s own explanation when direct proof of what happened inside a room is contested.