u/lotophage77

By the time Australian lawyer Samuel Monkivitch was charged by Hong Kong police for a dine-and-dash spree across the city that targeted restaurants and five-star hotels, his reputation was well known among the city’s dining scene.

On social media site Threads, Hongkongers circulated footage of Monkivitch being pursued by restaurant staff into the city’s streets chasing the unpaid bills, being physically restrained by citizens outside a venue, and abusing a bystander who filmed him as he fled a Chinese restaurant.

Monkivitch is in jail in Hong Kong after being detained on May 7 on four charges of “making off without payment” and two counts of “criminal damage” charges. Police allege the spree occurred between April 25 and May 5.

> Why did Counsel Assisting the Royal Commission ask for this letter to be read into the record when basic internet searching shows it to be largely wrong?

> If it stands solely as a rhetorical expression of a feeling of abandonment, perhaps that is sufficient purpose. However, what is the Royal Commission going to do about the record now that these claims have been shown to be false? If they are to stand, then what rights do the governments and police agencies at state and federal levels have to correct the record?

> And why would a witness, on oath, make claims that are so baseless when the mere facts of the attacks themselves prove antisemitism is rife and dangerous?