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 during the demonstration and assembly by the twelve defendants on 1 October 2019 between approximately 16:15 and 16:55 on Sha Tin Pass Road near its junction with Lung Cheung Road, they repeatedly threw bricks and petrol bombs and used miscellaneous items to erect roadblocks, blocking traffic lanes and clashing with the police. The Police Tactical Unit and the Special Tactical Contingent subsequently set up cordons at different sections. After multiple flag warnings and verbal warnings, and the firing of tear gas and rubber bullets, they subdued and arrested the defendants. In court the facts were admitted and video footage filmed by the police and downloaded from the internet (P114 to P120) was played, confirming that there were over a hundred to a thousand protesters obstructing roads and confronting the police at the scene. After their arrest, the defendants were photographed at the police station for identification and goggles, helmets, gas masks, gloves and other equipment were seized; hammers and laser pointers were found in some of their rucksacks.
According to Article 19 of the Public Order Ordinance on the offence of riot and the Supreme Court’s judgment in the “Lu Jianmin case”, the offence of riot must be assessed by the level of participation, the disruption to public order and the danger to public safety, having regard also to the defendant’s identity, motive and previous convictions, among other factors.
The judge held that, by relying on the time and place of arrest and the equipment carried by the defendants to rule out innocent passers-by, the prosecution had shown that most of the defendants participated in the riot in an organised and encouraging manner, thereby escalating the conflict; in view of their lack of criminal record and status as first-time offenders, an appropriate mitigation was applied under the law.
The judge emphasised the importance of maintaining public order, stating that participants in a riot, even if they did not personally throw objects, demonstrate encouraging participation by their presence, equipment and coordinated actions with others, and must be punished under the law with a deterrent effect.
It was ruled that defendants one to eleven were guilty of the offence of riot, while defendant twelve and D3 and D9 were not guilty of possessing offensive weapons. A separate sentencing hearing will be scheduled. (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, eleven defendants participated in a riot on 1 October 2019 between approximately 4:15 pm and 4:55 pm at the junction of Sha Tin Pass Road and Lung Cheung Road in Wong Tai Sin, Kowloon. At that time, over one hundred to one thousand demonstrators erected roadblocks using railings and miscellaneous items, occupying six lanes of the carriageway and repeatedly throwing bricks and petrol bombs. The police fired tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse them; the Rapid Response Unit cleared the area and subdued the defendants. The three minor defendants have applied for background and detention centre reports and are awaiting sentencing.
The maximum sentence for rioting is ten years, with no fixed sentencing guidelines. The court, relying on Court of Appeal and District Court case law and referring to the twelve sentencing considerations listed in the judgment, determined the appropriate penalty.
The riot lasted for over forty minutes. Although it involved more than one hundred to one thousand individuals confronting the police and throwing bricks and petrol bombs, there was no evidence that officers or members of the public were injured, and property damage was mainly confined to the roadblock structures. There was also no evidence that the defendants acted in an organisational, instigating or inciting capacity, nor did they assault police officers with weapons or commit other offences. The three defendants were only sixteen to eighteen years old at the time, all school students with good backgrounds and no prior convictions; they expressed remorse prior to trial, and both the probation officer’s report and the detention centre report recommended serving sentences in a reformative training centre or detention centre. In light of the twelve sentencing considerations for rioting and the individual circumstances of the defendants, they should be treated leniently.
The judge considered that the defendants participated only in an encouraging capacity and were low-level participants, and it would be inappropriate to impose the same heavy sentences as for those who led the riot. Taking into account the seriousness of the offence, the public interest and the defendants’ rehabilitation needs, detention at a training centre is an appropriate order, as it balances punishment with reform, is not excessively lenient, and provides education and vocational training to assist their reintegration into society and assumption of responsibility.
The court orders the defendants to serve their sentences in a training centre. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書