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。
The judgment states that, between 28 September and 1 October 2019, the premises rented by the defendants were forcibly searched by the police, who discovered materials capable of producing petrol bombs, personal belongings and a large quantity of protest gear. They were charged with alternative counts of conspiring to participate in a riot or an unlawful assembly. Five of them were arrested inside the premises, and the sixth defendant was provisionally released on a presumption of innocence due to weak evidence. The defence exercised the right to silence, and the court examined whether a conspiracy existed solely on the basis of the prosecution’s circumstantial and indirect evidence.
The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendants had already agreed to participate in a riot or unlawful assembly, including mutual consent, intention to participate and the feasibility of carrying it out.
Since the evidence fails to rule out multiple reasonable explanations, it cannot be proven that the defendants were aware of and agreed to manufacture or throw petrol bombs, nor that they had ever agreed to use violence or disrupt public order.
The court emphasised the need to avoid hindsight bias and must infer the existence of a plan solely from the circumstantial environment at the time of arrest. The current evidential basis is weak and insufficient to support a guilty verdict.
After considering all the evidence, the prosecution failed to meet the required legal standard of proof for the charges of conspiring to participate in a riot and an unlawful assembly against the six defendants, and all were acquitted and released. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判決理由書／裁決書