[ad_1]
On October 30 local time, Meng Wanzhou’s extradition case continued to be heard in Canada. Two years ago, Canadian Border Services officer Scott Kirkland, who was in charge of questioning Meng Wanzhou, told the court that when he realized that he had “mishandled” Meng Wanzhou’s mobile phone code to the federal police, “Red face.”
access:
2020 Tmall Double 11 Coupon Entry Global Goods Pre-sale will start on October 21
JD Double Eleven coupon entry: Top three home games will be reduced by 40 for every 300
Reuters reported that defense attorney Mona Duckett (Mona Duckett) questioned Kirkland in court on the 30th. Kirkland recorded the password and authentication information of Meng Wanzhou’s two mobile phones and computers in his work notes. Did the Royal Canadian Mounted Police get it?
Kirkland said that when he realized he had made a mistake, his heart hurt a lot and he said he had already “blushed” over that mistake.
Two days ago, Kirkland just admitted in court that it was a mistake to ask Meng Wanzhou to hand over his mobile phone password and hand it over to the federal police, and it violated privacy protection law. But he denied deliberately turning him over to the police.
The report also said Bryce McRae, the head of the Canadian Border Services Agency, who testified on the same day, said in court that the day before Meng Wanzhou arrived in Canada, he received the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). ) Asked you to provide the phone number for the shift supervisor the next day.
McCree said that he told the other party that he was on duty and left his phone with the other party, but that he did not know why the other party wanted the call. The call lasted only “maybe a minute or two.” McCree also stated that the FBI did not actually call the airport staff the next day.
According to documents on the illegal arrest of Meng Wanzhou in Canada exposed last year, Kirkland wrote in his work notes: “Seizure of two mobile phones … (of) Meng Wanzhou, etc.” The work notes also revealed that Meng Wanzhou was forced to hand over his mobile phone password that day, and Kirkland also wrote Meng Wanzhou’s mobile phone password in his notes.
Kirkland was subsequently exposed again in addition to writing the password in the log book, but also on paper. Their explanation for this is that this is their work habit, and this is usually done to remind them to change the password when the passport is returned to the holder. However, the note with the written code was later sent to the police.
In accordance with relevant laws and regulations, the Border Services Agency cannot pass on the information they obtain from immigrants to the police.
In a cross-examination on the 28th, Kirkland stated that at that time, Meng Wanzhou was questioned to determine if she could enter Canada, and they had to surrender her electronic equipment and related passwords. Kirkland claimed he had “national security” concerns about Meng Wanzhou.
However, Kirkland admitted on the 29th that from 2001 to October 2018, Meng Wanzhou had entered Canada 52 times and no one had questioned his entry into Canada. When asked by the defense attorney, “But on December 1, 2018, you are concerned about espionage,” Kirkland said it was true, but also admitted that in the final review there was no trace of evidence to support it. The so-called “national security” concerns.
Furthermore, when the defense attorneys hinted that “they confiscated the cell phone because the FBI wanted it,” Kirkland again denied that he did not know, but learned that after the police detained Meng Wanzhou, the cell phone and Meng. Wan Zhou will be removed by the police. “If the Royal Canadian Mounted Police will turn this over to the FBI, I don’t know.”
Canadian Border Services Agency detained Meng Wanzhou computer, British Columbia Superior Court
Witness questioning this week was part of the hearing on Meng Wanzhou’s extradition case, and many problems have been exposed. The police witness, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Winston Yep (Winston Yep), who arrested Meng Wanzhou two years ago, was accused of being dishonest in court and his testimony was contradictory. Later in court, Winston admitted in the interrogation process that he had obtained the judge’s provisional arrest warrant with an affidavit with incorrect content.
On the night of the 29th local time, Judge Heather Holmes of the Superior Court of British Columbia in Canada ruled that she was rejecting a request from the prosecutor’s attorney in the Meng Wanzhou extradition case. This means that the judge believes that there may be an “intentional omission of evidence” or a “significant omission of evidence” in the “case records” provided by the United States, so it can be listed as one of the reasons for requesting the termination of the extradition of Meng Wanzhou. Huawei Canada said in a statement to Reuters on the 30th that it was “a great victory.”
