Commission Against Corruption, Macao SAR

A policeman and a senior police officer were suspected of pocketing an exhibit collected when investigating into a karaoke fight case and of attempting to interfere with the investigations after the issue had been exposed. They were charged respectively for alleged misappropriation of public property, public servant showing partiality and breach of duty. The case was referred to the Public Prosecutions Office.

In one early morning of late February, a group fight erupted in a karaoke located in the Central District. The policemen went to the scene upon receiving the information. Most people involved had fled except for a few injured and certain articles belonging to some suspected fighters were left on the scene. A policeman conducting the investigation was suspected of pocketing a gold necklace, which was supposed to serve as an exhibit, left on the scene. A person who had lost article reported to the police station afterwards. The senior police officer on duty was alleged to have offered protection regarding the act of misappropriation and have interfered with the proper investigation procedure.

The CCAC launched the investigation upon receiving the complaint. It was found that on the day of the fight three people in the karaoke lost three gold chains and other articles. One policeman picked up and pocketed a gold necklace left on the ground. Afterwards a person reported his loss of gold chain to the police and requested for investigation. For fear that his act might be exposed, the policeman involved attempted to suppress the event by contacting the karaoke operator and some middlemen to return the suspected 'lost and found' gold chain to the case reporter. However, the case reporter later found out that the gold chain was not the one he had lost. Another person who had also lost a gold chain was informed of the 'news' and so requested for the return of his chain. It was suspected that the chain in question could not be returned for some special reasons and so the policeman involved "compensated" for the cost of the chain exceeding MOP6,000. It was alleged that someone had, by unusual means, made the case reporter lie to the police and withdraw his statement and that someone had tried to destroy the evidence saved in the security system.

One senior police officer, despite his alleged knowledge of the policeman's illegal act, was suspected of taking advantage of his position as on-duty police officer to offer protection to the act, to induce by improper and misleading ways the witness to change his statement and, to stop further investigation into the case due to insufficient conditions. The possibility of involvement of higher-ranking officers in the case was not excluded.

During investigation, someone confessed to having committed illegal acts. The case was referred to the Public Prosecutions Office.