Agree with above.
The prosecutions evidence (Namkung) was not credible in respect of the punching allegations. It seems strange, in my opinion, to then proceed on the other allegation based on the same (not credible) witness.
Presumably Judge Singh is erring on the side of caution and wishes to afford a fair opportunity for submissions first, prior to any determination.
I found it entertaining when the police prosecutor said his own witness was confused about recalling the brawl to which the Judge asked: "are you impeaching your own witness?"
If the second charge is also dismissed, I feel sorry for Corey. Whilst his contract was, as I understand it, terminated due to breaking team protocool, I personally think that the overhang of the charges were also a factor. Whilst sports stars should get their fare share if convicted of certain offences, you can't help but feel that they get a raw end of the stick (from an image standpoint, reputation and through their contracts/endorsements) just from going through the judicial system; even if later acquitted or where their charges are dismissed.
I'll reserve judgment until determination on the second charge, but I personally can't help but feel the prosecution were out to get a 'bigger fish' than your ordinary North Shore "Mr Smith"; the evidence was circumstantial. They already had the intent to injure charge thrown out; the shorts/trousers and the colour of the cap was misidentified. The other witness, the bar manager, could not "remember any faces" from the fight or identify the attacker. Again, I'll reserve my full analysis until after, but I'm bothered by this as a taxpayer.
