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 the six defendants rented a hotel room on Nathan Road from 3 to 5 February 2020, and repeatedly visited hardware stores and convenience stores to purchase flammable and corrosive substances to manufacture petrol bombs. On the evening of 4 February, five of the defendants, dressed in dark clothing, set up roadblocks at the junction of Nathan Road and Gansu Street and threw five incendiary petrol bombs, causing the road surface to catch fire and sustain damage. The defendants then changed clothes and fled separately. The police used room cards and receipts to track them back to the hotel room and arrested two defendants and their accomplices, seizing multiple petrol bombs, petrol, sulphuric acid, gas canisters, spray paint, towels, funnels, tools and other implements used to manufacture and carry out the destruction. The two defendants pleaded guilty in court to the charges of arson and possession of items with intent to destroy or damage property.
The maximum penalty for arson is life imprisonment. There is no specific sentencing guideline; generally, for arson without casualties, the sentencing range is 4 to 6 years. The maximum sentence for possession of items with intent to destroy property is 10 years’ imprisonment.
Taking into account that this case involved a planned destructive action with multiple people dividing tasks, was carried out in a busy, densely populated area, used multiple petrol bombs and highly unstable chemicals, posing a significant danger; that the criminal purpose was to continue the violence of the 2019 social movement and incite discontent; that the manufacturing site was in a residential area, increasing public safety risks; in view of the above, the baseline sentence for arson is 5 years and 6 months, and for the offence of possession with intent it is 4 years. Due to the guilty plea and overlapping circumstances, the sentences will be served in instalments.
The defendants’ conduct demonstrated a disregard for the lives and property of others; a severe sentence is necessary to achieve deterrence. Although their guilty plea and personal backgrounds were considered, they were not sufficient to substantially reduce the sentence, so a stern punishment remains appropriate.
For the arson offence, the two defendants were sentenced to 66 months’ imprisonment, reduced to 44 months; for the offence of possession of items with intent to destroy or damage property, they were sentenced to 36 months’ imprisonment, reduced to 24 months, of which six months are to be served in instalments. The total combined sentence is 50 months’ imprisonment. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書