A 71-year-old man's admission that he slashed his wife to death with a paper cutter should be tossed out because police secured the confession illegally, a court heard yesterday. When investigators questioned Fung Yuen-cheong about the murder of his wife two years ago, the soft-spoken man asked that his face not appear in a video of that conversation. Investigators ignored the request and then neglected to tell the unemployed Fung that he could probably get a lawyer free of charge, barrister John Haynes told the Court of Appeal. Mr Haynes asked the court to give his client a full appeal hearing. 'Any Hong Kong citizen could refuse a video even for a bad, silly or facile reason,' Mr Haynes told Mr Justice Michael Stuart-Moore, Madam Justice Clare-Marie Beeson and Mr Justice Michael Hartmann. 'He was nudged out of his objection, which even the supervising office agreed was a valid objection.' Fung got a life sentence in May last year after a Court of First instance jury convicted him in the murder of Mau Sau-kuen on June 7, 2006. The trial heard that Fung attacked his wife as the couple argued about who would live in their Housing Authority flat in Sha Tin once they divorced. A neighbour testified she responded to the woman's cries for help and found Mau lying on her back on the balcony - her jugular vein slashed - with Fung crouching next to her covered in blood and groping around her neck. Fung should not be punished for being soft-spoken, his barrister said. When investigators told him that they had to video his face during the interview, Fung quietly replied 'better not' twice in Cantonese, the court heard. But he soon relented and later confessed. If Fung had been given a lawyer and police respected his legal objection to the video, the man's admission might never have been seen, Mr Haynes said. 'The fact that he is not a rude man and doesn't shout out 'no way' doesn't matter,' Mr Haynes told the court.