L'universitaire de la CUHK qui aurait caché son statut matrimonial à une femme nie avoir été agressé

An associate professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK), Peng Peng, has denied charges of indecent assault following allegations made by a female colleague. Peng, 38, appeared before Sha Tin Court on Tuesday, where he entered a plea of not guilty to two counts of indecent assault. The case centers around a complaint from a fellow scholar, who had been pursuing an academic position and relocation prospects in Hong Kong. According to court records, the alleged incidents occurred on May 21, 2025, during a dinner at a restaurant in Ma On Shan after a visit to the university's art museum. The complainant, identified as a mainland Chinese woman, testified that Peng touched her waist and hip while they stood side by side in the restaurant. She also claimed that on an earlier occasion, he had placed his hand on her waist while they crossed a road. These accounts formed the basis of the prosecution's case against Peng. According to the university's official website, Peng is affiliated with the Department of Fine Arts and holds a doctoral degree from Princeton University. Peng's legal team, represented by senior counsel Tony Li Chung-yin, challenged the credibility of the complainant's testimony. During the proceedings, Li argued that the woman had not provided truthful evidence, suggesting inconsistencies in her account. This defense highlights the ongoing debate over the nature and validity of the alleged misconduct. The case has sparked discussions within academic circles regarding professional conduct and personal boundaries. The incident raises broader questions about workplace ethics and the handling of such allegations in academic institutions. Peng's denial underscores the complexity of such cases, where both parties may present conflicting narratives. The university has not issued a public statement on the matter, though internal protocols likely govern how such allegations are addressed. Legal experts suggest that the outcome will depend heavily on the evidence presented during the trial, including witness testimonies and any physical or digital evidence available. Legal observers note that the case could set a precedent for similar allegations involving academics. The courtroom proceedings have drawn attention due to the high-profile nature of the defendant and the potential implications for institutional trust. As the trial progresses, further details about the context of their interactions and the specific circumstances of the alleged incidents may emerge. The court is expected to continue its hearings in the coming weeks, with a final verdict anticipated once all evidence has been reviewed.