香港特別行政區 訴 李家田及另一人

香港特別行政區 訴 李家田及另一人

The court held that the prosecution had established prima facie authenticity of the digital evidence extracted from the defendant's iPhone using Cellebrite and that police expert 8774 was qualified to give the necessary expert evidence; therefore the Cellebrite-derived exhibits are admissible, while further...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 1171
Parties
Prosecution: 香港特別行政區; Fourth Defendant: 李家田; Fifth Defendant: 賴振邦
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 September 2024
Case Number
HCCC164/2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Admissibility Hearing
Outcome
Prosecution permitted to tender the contested digital evidence; exhibits extracted from P880 via Cellebrite admitted as prima facie authentic
Legal Topics
Admissibility, Prima Facie Authenticity, Expert Evidence, Hearsay, Cellebrite, Chain of Custody, Line and I OS Forensic Issues, Co Conspirator Rule
Source Language
ct
Criminal Law Evidence Law Digital Forensics Admissibility Prima Facie Authenticity Expert Evidence Hearsay Cellebrite +3 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

香港特別行政區

Prosecution

李家田

Fourth Defendant

賴振邦

Fifth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Pre Trial Admissibility Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether digital evidence extracted from the defendant's iPhone via Cellebrite is prima facie authentic and admissible
  2. 2 Whether the Cellebrite software and extraction method are sufficiently reliable and industry-accepted to support admissibility
  3. 3 Whether the expert (8774) is qualified to give opinion evidence about Cellebrite and related forensic matters

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the prosecution had established prima facie authenticity of the digital evidence extracted from the defendant's iPhone using Cellebrite and that police expert 8774 was qualified to give the necessary expert evidence; therefore the Cellebrite-derived exhibits are admissible, while further challenges to reliability and weight are matters for the jury at trial.

Court Disposition

Prosecution permitted to tender the contested digital evidence; exhibits extracted from P880 via Cellebrite admitted as prima facie authentic

Orders

  • Expert 8774 accepted as qualified to give forensic expert evidence on Cellebrite extractions
  • Prosecution permitted to present Cellebrite-extracted data from exhibit P880 at trial