Should the "in" be removed?

In his heyday, Dr Wong testified in several seminal court cases as an expert witness, including in the murder trial of Freddy Tan in 1968 which led to the abolition of the jury system.

  1. Should the “in” after “including” be removed?

  2. Should there be a comma after “1968”?



No. It is correct with including in.
I think a comma is necessary because the ‘which’ stands for the murder trial of Freddy Tan in 1968.


I would say: ‘including the murder trial of…’ removing ‘in’ makes sense to me.

Including - is a preposition so you don’t need another one.

Adding the comma after 1968 is a good idea!


in must be removed in my opinion

1 Like

Hi Asli, welcome to our forum. It’s good to see you have been able to register after all :wink:

I think we have to look at what “including” is referring to.
If the author means “including testifying in the murder trial…” the sentence is correct and, I think, draws a stronger relationship between Dr. Wong’s testimony and the abolition of the jury system.
If he means “including the court case of the murder trial…” then “in” should be deleted and the comma included.