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 judgement, the defendant gathered outside the Mong Kok Police Station on the evening of 22 September 2019 with over a hundred protesters. At around 10 pm on Prince Edward Road West, they blocked the road with trash bins, cardboard and the like and set fires; at about 11.30 pm they again obstructed the road with barriers and miscellaneous items and ignited them. The prosecution relied on publicly available media footage and police stops, identifying the defendant by features including a golden-blonde ponytail, a black long-sleeved top, blue jeans, white trainers, a nape tattoo and a rucksack, alleging that they twice threw plant branches and cardboard into the fires to aid combustion. The defendant was subsequently intercepted on Lai Chi Kok Road, where a helmet, gas mask, gloves and a laser pointer were recovered. The defence questioned the identification details and the intended use of the laser pointer.
Pursuant to sections 60(1), (3) and 63(1) of the Crimes Ordinance and sections 19(1), (2) and 33(1), (2) of the Public Order Ordinance, the sentencing guidelines for arson and riot offences are applied.
The defendant deliberately set fires on two occasions to aid combustion and participated in a riot, seriously disrupting public order and endangering public safety, warranting punishment and deterrence; as for the charge of possession of a laser pointer, the prosecution failed to exclude reasonable doubt, and therefore no conviction is entered.
After carefully comparing the publicly available footage with the arrest photographs, this bench is satisfied that the overall features—including the defendant’s golden-blonde ponytail, style of spectacles, clothing buttons, jeans, green label on the trainers, nape tattoo and rucksack—match reliably, confirming their participation in arson and riot; the defence’s inference regarding the intended use of the laser pointer is insufficient, and in light of reasonable doubt no conviction is entered on that count.
The defendant is convicted of two counts of arson and one count of riot; the charge of possession of an offensive weapon in a public place is not upheld. (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 facts of the case indicate that on the evening of 22 September 2019, the defendant set fire on two occasions and took part in a riot during protest activities around the Mong Kok Police Station and Prince Edward Road West. About a hundred people gathered that night, shining laser beams at police officers, throwing hard objects and damaging facilities outside the station; at about 10:00 pm and 11:30 pm protesters set fire to cardboard and miscellaneous items on the road, blocking carriageways. The blaze was intense and posed a serious danger to the public. The police later intercepted the defendant on Lai Chi Kok Road and found a helmet, a gas mask and other tools in his backpack. After trial, the court, based on the defendant’s golden ponytail, jacket, trainers and tattoos as seen in the video, concluded that he had committed two counts of arson and one count of riot.
In accordance with the relevant provisions of the Crimes Ordinance and the Public Order Ordinance, with reference to the sentencing guidelines for riot and arson offences, and taking into account factors such as the degree of planning, the number of participants, the means of violence and public disturbance, and having regard to relevant precedents, the starting point for sentencing was determined.
The defendant, although not a leader, used an accelerant to intensify the blaze and obstructed the road, thereby disturbing social order; the court, having considered his lack of prior convictions, his guilty plea and his mental health and other mitigating factors, reduced the starting point for the arson offences from 4.5 years to 4 years and for the riot offence from 5 years to 4.5 years, and ordered them to be served concurrently.
The court held that the defendant’s conduct posed a serious threat to public safety, warranting an immediate custodial sentence for punishment and deterrence, while also taking into account his background and the mitigating factors to avoid an unduly lenient sentence.
The defendant was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment for each of the two arson offences and four and a half years’ imprisonment for the riot offence, all to be served concurrently, resulting in an effective sentence of four and a half years. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書