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 eight defendants on the evening of 29 August 2019, in the vicinity outside Sham Shui Po Police Station in Kowloon, engaged in conduct that disrupted public order by shouting, using high-powered laser pointers to illuminate the police station and officers, and obstructing traffic; moreover, five of them threw bricks at the police station’s substation. Most of the defendants denied the charges, but the third defendant pleaded guilty on the first day; the fourth defendant submitted an application that he was mentally unfit to stand trial and, after a hearing, was found unfit, and his case was dealt with separately. The prosecution relied primarily on police CCTV footage and testimony from multiple officers, alleging personal participation in or encouragement of the riot.
Under section 18 (unlawful assembly) and section 19 (riot) of the Public Order Ordinance (Cap. 245) of the Laws of Hong Kong, the participatory requirements necessitate proof that a defendant acted in concert with other assemblers and possessed the intention and conduct to disturb public peace; additionally, for the offence of illegal possession of an offensive weapon, it must be shown that the defendant knew the item could be used to cause harm and intended to use it for that purpose.
The court, having considered the broader social context at the time, the on-site footage, and police testimony, found that several defendants were within the key area, ignored repeated verbal warnings and blue-flag signals, remained for a prolonged period, used laser pointers to illuminate the police station or displayed their equipment in protest, and that the cumulative effect demonstrated their intention to participate in and foment the riot; however, as the fourth and eighth defendants failed to prove an intention to riot or to harm others, the charges against them were not established.
The court accepted the CCTV footage and police testimony as honest and reliable, and in applying section 75A of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, it gave particular scrutiny to the understanding of a person lacking capacity regarding their actions and intentions, emphasising that conduct and intent must corroborate each other to establish the offence of participating in a riot.
The court convicted the third, first, second, fifth, sixth and seventh defendants of the offence of riot; the fourth and eighth defendants were acquitted of both riot and possession of an offensive weapon and were declared not guilty. (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 eight defendants took part in a demonstration on the evening of 29 August 2019 in the Sham Shui Po area. The protesters shone green, blue and red laser pointers and torches at the walls of the police station and at officers, and some threw bricks, obstructing traffic. The police issued multiple verbal appeals and warnings; when the protesters refused to stop, the police carried out dispersal and arrest operations. After a trial, some defendants were convicted of rioting and of possessing an offensive weapon in a public place, while the other charges were not upheld.
According to the Public Order Ordinance and the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, the maximum penalty for rioting is ten years’ imprisonment. Sentencing must take into account the scale of the riot, the number of participants, its duration, the degree of violence, the impact on the police station and public order, and adhere to principles of retribution and deterrence.
The court, having considered the protesters’ brick-throwing incident, the use of weapons and laser pointers against the police station, and their refusal to disperse after warnings, set a starting sentence of 34 months. Taking into account the defendants’ guilty pleas and mitigation materials, this was reduced to 32 months or 26 months; the juvenile defendants, due to their age and rehabilitation needs, were sentenced to detention at a training centre.
The judge considered rioting to be a serious offence, noting that the protesters openly challenged law enforcement and that a robust response to the overall riot conduct was necessary; however, given that the scale and impact of this case were relatively minor compared to similar cases, appropriate discretion could be exercised for peripheral participants.
The court sentenced the three adult defendants to imprisonment: the two who pleaded guilty first had their sentences reduced to 32 months in custody, and the other, who pleaded guilty later, was reduced to 26 months (with 24 months to be served concurrently); the remaining four juvenile defendants were sent to a training centre for detention, where they will receive disciplinary training and psychological counselling. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書