Case of fake devices poses key questions

First published: 11^th May 2013

I refer to the case of James McCormick ("Briton James McCormick jailed for 10 years for selling fake bomb detectors", May 2).

It was reported that he had told a British court that he had sold the fake devices to "Hong Kong's prison service".

He made bold claims about what this equipment could do.

Can the Correctional Services Department confirm or deny the purchase?

If a purchase of this fake equipment was made, can the department explain what it is doing to claim a refund, and, more importantly, how it intends to prevent unwise purchases in future?

May I suggest independent testing of equipment, and a basic school science course for the relevant decision-makers?