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 notes that at around 3:45 pm on 29 September 2019, a group wearing black clothing and masks gathered outside the Central Government Offices in Admiralty and attacked the police line by throwing petrol bombs, bricks and other objects. The police deployed water cannon vehicles to disperse them, and between 4:45 pm and 5:00 pm arrested three defendants at Harcourt Road, Admiralty Centre, Tim Wa Avenue and other locations. The defendants were in possession of umbrellas, goggles, gloves, gas masks, torches, face masks, backpacks and other items. The defence did not appear, and the court examined the level of their participation to determine whether it constituted a riot.
According to the Public Order Ordinance and the Court of Final Appeal’s precedents, a riot requires three or more persons to assemble unlawfully and disturb public peace. The court must examine the defendants’ participation, equipment and conduct at the time and place of the incident.
In view of the fact that the defendants were in possession of umbrellas, protective gear and gas masks for offensive and defensive use when they were arrested at the height of the riot, and that they resisted arrest and did not confess, the court concluded that their actions were coordinated with other rioters and demonstrated criminal intent, and that the only reasonable conclusion was active participation in the riot.
The judge considered the prosecution witnesses’ testimony to be honest and reliable, and held that the incomplete CCTV footage did not affect the substance of the case; the defence’s mere speculative argument was insufficient. The defendants were not bystanders, and their attire and reactions at the scene showed organised participation.
The three defendants were convicted of riot, and sentencing was adjourned. (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 stated that at around 3pm on 29 September 2019, a large-scale and serious riot broke out outside the Government Headquarters in Admiralty. Demonstrators threw bricks, stones and petrol bombs, and the scene was like a battlefield. The three defendants were arrested separately near Harcourt Road close to the Government Headquarters, claiming they were merely passing by or observing. Trial evidence showed that they wore dark clothing and carried masks, umbrellas, goggles and other equipment, and were intercepted during police dispersal operations. After trial the three were found guilty. Today the court sentenced the second and third defendants and deferred the sentencing of the first defendant to 10 am on 20 June.
The maximum penalty for the offence of rioting is 10 years’ imprisonment, with no fixed guidelines. In the cases of Leung Tin-kei and Tang Ho-yin, the Court of Appeal set out 12 factors to consider, including the number of participants, the degree and scale of violence, the duration, the level of threat, the symbolic target, and the role of and degree of participation by the offender, etc.
In this case the scale of the riot was unprecedented and directly struck at the political core of Hong Kong. The defendants showed no remorse and offered no genuine mitigating reasons. Their claims of mere observation are hard to justify. Their presence at the scene carrying protest equipment was sufficient to encourage violence, and a deterrent sentence is required.
The judge considered that the defendants downplayed their involvement by deceiving themselves, effectively supporting and encouraging the riot. They must be severely punished to serve as a warning to others.
The court used a starting point sentence of four and a half years, convicting the second and third defendants each of one count of rioting, to be imprisoned for four and a half years; and deferred the sentencing of the first defendant to 10 am on 20 June. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書