判決理由書／裁決書撮要(由AI生成)
以下撮要以AI生成及／或翻譯，內容以原來的判決理由書／裁決書為準。
According to the judgment, on 7 September 2019 dozens of protesters gathered at Sha Tin station to confront the Railway Police. During the incident the third defendant shone a torch’s bright beam at an officer, who countered with pepper spray and pursued him into the station. A scuffle ensued in which the defendant bit the officer; later, two laser pointers were found in the control room. The police reviewed CCTV and media footage, tracing two defendants wearing identical clothing, backpacks and glasses before and after the incident. The three denied the charges; after the trial the court confirmed their identities and the evidence, finding them guilty of rioting, assaulting a police officer, resisting arrest and possession of an offensive weapon.
Pursuant to the relevant provisions of the Public Order Ordinance and the Summary Offences Ordinance, the sentencing principles for serious offences—including public order offences, assaulting a police officer, resisting a public officer and possession of an offensive weapon—shall apply, taking into account factors such as the degree of danger to public order, the extent of injury to the officer and the defendant’s motive.
The defendant actively participated in the riot and assaulted and resisted police officers lawfully performing their duties, and was in possession of laser pointers capable of causing harm. The evidence is reliable and sufficient to prove his criminal intent and dangerousness; he must be severely punished to uphold the rule of law.
The judge held that the police’s use of force did not exceed reasonable bounds; the CCTV footage, forensic evidence and witness testimony were credible, ruling out any possibility of self-defence by the defendants or interference with the evidence. Overall, the evidence satisfied the standard of beyond reasonable doubt.
The three defendants were each found guilty as charged and will have their specific sentences announced at the sentencing hearing. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判決理由書／裁決書
判刑理由書撮要(由AI生成)
以下撮要以AI生成及／或翻譯，內容以原來的判刑理由書為準。
The judgment states that on the evening of 7 September 2019, the defendants confronted police officers at MTR Sha Tin station. The third defendant shone a flashlight’s intense beam at officers on duty, causing police to give chase and grapple with them at the scene. The crowd lost control, and dozens of protesters threw umbrellas and metal debris and stormed the control room door. During this, the first defendant threw a metal mooncake tin at an officer’s head, while the second defendant raised an umbrella to obstruct the door from closing. Riot police arrived and dispersed the crowd. Police also found two laser pointers capable of causing blindness in the third defendant’s backpack. They were thus charged with rioting, assaulting police, resisting arrest and possessing offensive weapons.
Under section 19 of the Public Order Ordinance, rioting carries a maximum sentence of ten years’ imprisonment, with the District Court able to impose up to seven years; and, following the Court of Appeal’s guidance in the Leung Tin-kei case, sentencing factors include the level of planning, number of participants, degree of violence, and impact on public safety and social order.
The defendants collectively participated in violence against police officers and disrupted public order in serious circumstances. The court emphasised the need for punitive and deterrent sentences. The sentencing starting point for the first two defendants’ rioting offences was three years and six months, increased by two months for involvement with public transport facilities; the first defendant received an additional three months for assaulting police; the third defendant received three months for resisting arrest with a weapon and nine months for possessing laser pointers that assisted the offence and incited the riot.
The judge held that violent attacks on police officers and the disruption of public order are absolutely intolerable and must not be excused by political motivation, stressing that adult defendants must be held accountable for their actions and that deterrent sentences are necessary to uphold the rule of law and protect public safety.
After the trial, the first defendant was sentenced to three years and eight months’ imprisonment for rioting and three months for assaulting police (one month to run consecutively with the rioting sentence and the remainder concurrently), totalling three years and nine months; the second defendant was sentenced to three years and eight months’ imprisonment for rioting; the third defendant was sentenced to three months for resisting arrest and nine months for possessing an offensive weapon, both terms to be served consecutively, amounting to twelve months in total. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書