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 the two defendants are secondary school students. The first defendant brought two foil-wrapped packets of TATP explosive powder (each the size of four peas and one-eighth of a pea) onto the school premises and handed them to a teacher for safekeeping. The police later came to the school to investigate and confirmed that the powder was a high-performance detonating explosive. After his arrest, the first defendant was also found to be concealing an industrial blank cartridge. The second defendant was intercepted in the school hall while holding one of the packets of powder and claimed not to know it was explosive. After trial, the court found that the first defendant knowingly possessed explosives and ammunition, while the second defendant was acquitted due to lack of intent to possess and a reasonable belief that the powder was not an explosive.
Pursuant to section 55(1) of the Criminal Offences Ordinance and section 13 of the Firearms and Ammunition Ordinance
The first defendant’s claim that the experiment and self-study were for a lawful purpose was rejected by the court, which found it to be mere thrill-seeking that disregarded risks to persons and property; the second defendant, lacking intent to possess and having reasonably believed the powder was not explosive, satisfied the statutory defence requirements
The defence of lawful purpose was based on insincere and high-risk facts and should not be extended; as for the second defendant, considering his youth, his reaction at the scene and his attitude, it is reasonable to believe he had no criminal intent and a verdict of not guilty is appropriate
Defendant one was convicted on two counts of possession of explosives and one count of unauthorised possession of ammunition; defendant two was not convicted of possession of explosives; the court will set a date at a later time for sentencing. (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 the defendant, an 18-year-old Form 6 student, was in possession at school of two packets, each containing four pea-sized portions and an eighth of a pea-sized portion of triacetone triperoxide (TATP) powder, and a P9 blank cartridge was discovered during a search at the police station. The defendant claimed that the powder was given by a person dressed in black whom he met on the street, that he tested it at home before bringing it back to school to seek advice from a teacher; he said he found the ammunition by the roadside and kept it as a collectible. After an investigation by the school and the police, an explosives expert confirmed that the powder was highly sensitive and dangerous, and the defendant was charged with three offences and convicted.
For young offenders, balancing punishment, condemnation, deterrence and rehabilitation, taking into account the seriousness of the offence, specific circumstances and the feasibility of alternative custodial sentences, such as labour education centres, juvenile training centres or rehabilitation centres, while also referring to the balancing principle indicated by the Court of Appeal in the SWS case.
Although the offences are serious, there is no evidence they were intended to undermine social tranquillity; the behaviour appears purely curious and reckless; the defendant is a first-time offender, aged 18, with no prior convictions and expresses remorse, is on medication for depression and has rehabilitation potential. Taking into account that he has been held in custody for almost four months, immediate punishment would also have a deterrent effect.
Detention is not the only appropriate option; the defendant’s rehabilitation needs must be taken into account. The court agrees that a labour education centre can provide strict discipline and labour training, and that one year of supervision after release would best balance punishment and correction.
The defendant was detained at a labour education centre for the three offences, with all sentences to run concurrently. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書