anti-elab-1373 DCCC55/2020 Riot

文件編號:

anti-elab-1373

案件編號:

DCCC55/2020

控罪:

Riot

涉事日期 :

2019-10-01

涉事地點 :

Wong Tai Sin

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 noted that on the afternoon of 1 October last year, riot police were deployed on Tung Tau Tsuen Road to protect the disciplined services quarters when they discovered approximately two hundred protesters wearing black clothing, gas masks and construction helmets gathered outside Lung Wai House, hurling bricks, debris and petrol bombs at the police line. The police first raised a red flag and then a black flag to warn them before firing tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse the crowd. When about ten individuals broke away from the umbrella formation and continued throwing objects, one person who was not wearing a helmet (the defendant) threw a brick at the police. The defendant was then chased by officers to the outside of Kei Hip Secondary School, subdued and arrested on a charge of unlawful assembly.

The prosecution must prove the defendant’s commission of the offence of riot beyond reasonable doubt. In determining conviction and sentence, the court should consider factors such as the degree of risk the defendant’s actions posed to public safety, the defendant’s role in the incident, and the absence of any prior convictions.

Given the inconsistencies in the police witness’s observations of the defendant throwing bricks and the fact that the video footage depicts a chaotic scene that does not eliminate reasonable doubt, the prosecution has failed to meet the required standard of proof. Consequently, conviction is not appropriate.

The judge held that the prosecution relied primarily on oral testimony but failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the defendant’s injuries or key details such as whether a fire engine was present at the scene. The witness accounts were contradictory, and applying the principle that any doubt benefits the defendant, the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction.

The defendant was ultimately acquitted of the charge of riot, adjudged not guilty in accordance with the law, and immediately released. (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

No Reasons for sentence.

Case Details

File No. anti-elab-1373
Case No. DCCC55/2020
Judge Shum Kei-leong Timon
Court District Court
Verdict Not convicted
Charge Riot
Incident Date 2019-10-01
Incident Location Wong Tai Sin
Reasons for Verdict View
Reasons for Verdict (AI Summary) The judgment noted that on the afternoon of 1 October last year, riot police were deployed on Tung Tau Tsuen Road to protect the disciplined services quarters when they discovered approximately two hundred protesters wearing black clothing, gas masks and construction helmets gathered outside Lung Wai House, hurling bricks, debris and petrol bombs at the police line. The police first raised a red flag and then a black flag to warn them before firing tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse the crowd. When about ten individuals broke away from the umbrella formation and continued throwing objects, one person who was not wearing a helmet (the defendant) threw a brick at the police. The defendant was then chased by officers to the outside of Kei Hip Secondary School, subdued and arrested on a charge of unlawful assembly.</p><p>The prosecution must prove the defendant's commission of the offence of riot beyond reasonable doubt. In determining conviction and sentence, the court should consider factors such as the degree of risk the defendant's actions posed to public safety, the defendant's role in the incident, and the absence of any prior convictions.</p><p>Given the inconsistencies in the police witness's observations of the defendant throwing bricks and the fact that the video footage depicts a chaotic scene that does not eliminate reasonable doubt, the prosecution has failed to meet the required standard of proof. Consequently, conviction is not appropriate.</p><p>The judge held that the prosecution relied primarily on oral testimony but failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the defendant's injuries or key details such as whether a fire engine was present at the scene. The witness accounts were contradictory, and applying the principle that any doubt benefits the defendant, the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction.</p><p>The defendant was ultimately acquitted of the charge of riot, adjudged not guilty in accordance with the law, and immediately released. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
Reasons for Sentence (AI Summary) No Reasons for sentence.

裁判官/法官:

Shum Kei-leong Timon

法院:

District Court

認罪:

沒有

罪成:

Not convicted

判刑:

沒有

相近案件