涉事地點 :
PolyU (The Hong Kong Polytechnic University)
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, the incident occurred in the early morning of 18 November 2019. After police cleared Jordan Road, protesters retreated to the junction of Nathan Road and Waterloo Road; some threw bricks and petrol bombs, and about ten people ran into a side street off 524A Nathan Road. Police entered the side street and subsequently arrested Defendants One to Four in an alleyway and at its end. Defendants Two and Three were wearing protective masks or gas masks at the time; the remaining defendants were dressed in dark clothing and carried umbrellas, goggles, gloves and other equipment. Defendant One admitted he was unable to produce proof of identity; the other defendants denied the charges of riot and using a face covering, and the court proceeded to hear all charges.
The judge referred to sections 18 and 19 of the Public Order Ordinance regarding the definitions of unlawful assembly and riot, and, with reference to local precedents, established guidelines on the statutory sentencing range and sentencing principles for the offences of riot and wearing a face covering, including factors such as level of participation, use of equipment and obstruction of law enforcement.
Defendant Three wore a helmet, mask and gloves during the evolution of an unlawful assembly into a riot, knowing that a riot was imminent or underway, and still voluntarily joined in, using the equipment to prevent identification, thereby clearly instigating and supporting the riot. The nature of his conduct is serious and warrants severe punishment. For the other defendants, as the prosecution failed to remove reasonable doubt and there is insufficient evidence to prove their participation in the riot or use of a face covering, the court found the charges unsubstantiated.
The judge considers that Defendant Three’s subjective malice and objective conduct both support his classification as a co-rioter. He not only showed no remorse but also used protective equipment to bolster the riotous force and must be severely punished; in contrast, the evidence against the other defendants is insufficient and they should be released.
Defendant Three was convicted of the offence of riot and of using a face covering in an unlawful assembly; all charges against Defendants One, Two and Four were dismissed and they were immediately released. The court will set another date for the sentencing of Defendant Three. (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。
According to the judgment, from 17 to 18 November 2019, protesters initially confronted the police at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University and on Jordan Road, hurling bricks and petrol bombs, then moved to continue rioting near the Yoshinoya restaurant on Nathan Road. The police fired rubber bullets and charged into side streets, arresting some of the defendants. One defendant failed to produce identity documents, while another, wearing a helmet, face mask and gloves, mingled with the crowd.
There are no fixed guidelines for sentencing on the offences of riot and using masked items during an unlawful assembly; consideration must be given to the scale of the riot, the extent of damage and the role played by the defendant. The offence of failing to produce identity documents carries a maximum fine of HK$5,000.
The defendant failed to explain why they did not carry documents at the scene of the riot; the starting point for the fine was HK$3,000, reduced by one-third to HK$2,000 for pleading guilty. For the riot and masking offences, the defendant knowingly remained with the crowd during the riot, thereby encouraging it, and has previous convictions; no reduction was granted, with starting custodial terms of 4 years and 6 months to be served concurrently.
The judge noted that lingering with the rioting crowd constitutes support and encouragement for the rioters and must be treated severely; those with prior convictions should not receive lenient sentences, and wearing masks is linked to the riot.
The defendant was fined HK$2,000 for failing to produce identity documents; sentenced to 4 years’ imprisonment for riot and 6 months’ imprisonment for using masked items during an unlawful assembly, with both sentences to run concurrently, totalling 4 years’ imprisonment. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書