冇犯法都可能要坐監..法律公平嗎 ?

Based on the situation, B and C does not look good at all.

However, due to the legal system has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the person(s) is guilty as charged. So there are several things can be done (without obstructing justice).

1. Dis-credit the witness - The key here is to prove that the witness (the thief) is not creditable in term of his testimony by proving that he did steal the phone and sold it.

Although doing so does not explain anything at all, it gave a motive (or excuse) to the witness that he is willing to go with B and C as he knows he is in trouble.

2. The Course of Confinement - Confinement means he was hold without his consent. But why did he meet B and C in the first place? In other word, B and C has to "invite" the witness to come out so that he can go to B's company. Text message, phone record can be helpful to prove that he is not held as hostage.

3. B's and C's reaction - Did B and C stop A from hitting the witness?

It is simply my opinion. It may work or not work. You should probably discuss with your lawyers with my opinion.

如果你所講既係事實, 只要A講番件事人係佢自己打, 數係佢自己追, B 同 C 只係因為識小偷所以先做介紹, 不過如果入到:非法禁錮, 勒索, 及打人, B 同 C都會係同謀, 並唔可以置身事外, 唉, 其實俾人偷竊仲要知道邊個係小偷又點會唔報警? 仲要佢簽欠單?你故佢借錢唔還咩？　我都有懷疑，法官又點會唔懷疑？？

首先你係咪已經知道, 邊個人偷咗你電話? 你地幾個人到過既地方, 有無CCTV- 閉路電視, 看更; 管理員...等證人. 可以證明當事人並未被脅持. , 包括你地到達, 同埋離開的情況及細節. 你地第一次俾差人請番去, 攞口供之時, 是否- 1. 支唔以; 2. 極力否認...等? 點解仲可以俾差人食住上- 如果你話無做的話.
另愈無錢; 愈無物業, 搵法援就最著數. 聽下律師講囉, 或者你走去告你個FD偷電話都得既.