Mother details finances and property row in Choi trial
HK01 · 9 SOURCESabout 2 hours ago6 MIN
Summary
The High Court trial over the killing and dismemberment of Abby Choi Tin-fung continued on Monday with her mother, Cheung Yin-fa (張燕花), giving evidence as the prosecution’s first live witness. Cheung said Choi met former husband Kwong Kong-chi (鄺港智) while they were studying at an international school, and that he later moved into her home before Choi became pregnant as a teenager. She told the court that Choi’s family paid for the couple’s living costs and the upbringing of their two children, while the Kwong family “never bought even one tin of milk powder”. Cheung also said a Kadoorie Hill flat bought in 2019 was funded by the Tam family, registered in Kwong Kau’s name only to avoid more than HK$9 million in stamp duty, and later became the subject of a dispute when Choi wanted it returned and sold.
Key Points
- Three defendants — former brother-in-law Kwong Kong-kit, former father-in-law Kwong Kau and former husband Kwong Kong-chi — deny murder over Choi’s death on 21 February 2023; Kwong Kong-kit and Kwong Kong-chi admit preventing lawful burial, while Kwong Kau denies that charge
- The prosecution read agreed facts that police entered the Lung Mei Tsuen unit on 24 February 2023 and found Choi’s remains in two cooking pots, with toxicology showing no common drugs or poisons in tested tissue samples.
- Cheung said her second husband had once run three restaurants in Hong Kong, later moved to Hainan for business, and sent home more than HK$1 million a month for family expenses.
- She said Choi met Kwong at Sear Roger International School, dated him at 17, and he moved into the family home at 18 before Choi became pregnant while still attending school.
- Cheung said the Kadoorie Hill flat cost HK$68 million, with more than HK$9 million spent on renovation and furnishings, all funded by Choi or the Tam family, not the Kwongs.
Why It Matters
Cheung’s evidence goes directly to the prosecution’s account of the financial relationships, living arrangements and property dispute surrounding Choi, all of which may shape how the jury understands motive and family dynamics. For Hong Kong readers, the testimony also places the case in a clearer timeline, linking the children’s care, the Kadoorie Hill ownership structure and the later conflict over returning the flat.