anti-elab-2997 DCCC636/2020 Riot

文件編號:

anti-elab-2997

案件編號:

DCCC636/2020

控罪:

Riot

涉事日期 :

2019-11-18

涉事地點 :

Jordan

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

No Reasons for Verdict.

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 during the PolyU siege on 18 November 2019, ten defendants participated in an organised riot in the area from Gascoigne Road to Nathan Road, erecting roadblocks, throwing petrol bombs, and engaging in successive clashes with the police, paralysing the heart of Kowloon. After the previous reasons for judgment set out the facts and evidence in detail, all ten defendants were convicted of rioting; two were additionally convicted of possessing offensive weapons or possessing offensive weapons in a public place, while the charges against one defendant were dismissed.

Under the Public Order Ordinance, the maximum penalty for rioting is ten years’ imprisonment. The Court of Appeal indicated that the starting point for sentencing is approximately five years, and in serious cases a proportionate upward adjustment should be made. The purpose of sentencing is to deter collective violence and maintain public order.

The court emphasised that the focus of sentencing is to combat and deter acts that undermine social order. Although mitigating factors such as youth, education, background, and remorse were considered, personal circumstances are not the primary consideration; maintaining the rule of law and protecting the public interest must take precedence.

The judge acknowledged that many defendants were high-achieving young people from well-off families and that sentencing would have a significant impact on them and their families. However, in the face of violent challenges to the rule of law, compassion cannot justify reducing the penalty, although leniency may be afforded within legal bounds for those who show remorse and plead guilty.

Each defendant was sentenced to immediate imprisonment, with terms ranging from 44 to 56 months: two defendants had their sentences reduced to 56 months in light of their level of participation and remorse; several defendants had their sentences reduced to 50 months after considering their backgrounds and conduct; another defendant’s sentence was further reduced to 48 months at the court’s discretion; and the final defendant who pleaded guilty received a one-third sentence reduction, being sentenced to 44 months. All sentences are to be served concurrently, with no orders for probation or placement in a labour training centre sought. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)

查看完整判刑理由書

Case Details

File No. anti-elab-2997
Case No. DCCC636/2020
Judge LIN Kam Hung, Ernest
Court District Court No. 23
Verdict Convicted
Charge Riot
Sentence Imprisonment
Incident Date 2019-11-18
Incident Location Jordan
Reasons for Verdict (AI Summary) No Reasons for Verdict.
Reasons for Sentence View
Reasons for Sentence (AI Summary) The judgment states that during the PolyU siege on 18 November 2019, ten defendants participated in an organised riot in the area from Gascoigne Road to Nathan Road, erecting roadblocks, throwing petrol bombs, and engaging in successive clashes with the police, paralysing the heart of Kowloon. After the previous reasons for judgment set out the facts and evidence in detail, all ten defendants were convicted of rioting; two were additionally convicted of possessing offensive weapons or possessing offensive weapons in a public place, while the charges against one defendant were dismissed.</p><p>Under the Public Order Ordinance, the maximum penalty for rioting is ten years' imprisonment. The Court of Appeal indicated that the starting point for sentencing is approximately five years, and in serious cases a proportionate upward adjustment should be made. The purpose of sentencing is to deter collective violence and maintain public order.</p><p>The court emphasised that the focus of sentencing is to combat and deter acts that undermine social order. Although mitigating factors such as youth, education, background, and remorse were considered, personal circumstances are not the primary consideration; maintaining the rule of law and protecting the public interest must take precedence.</p><p>The judge acknowledged that many defendants were high-achieving young people from well-off families and that sentencing would have a significant impact on them and their families. However, in the face of violent challenges to the rule of law, compassion cannot justify reducing the penalty, although leniency may be afforded within legal bounds for those who show remorse and plead guilty.</p><p>Each defendant was sentenced to immediate imprisonment, with terms ranging from 44 to 56 months: two defendants had their sentences reduced to 56 months in light of their level of participation and remorse; several defendants had their sentences reduced to 50 months after considering their backgrounds and conduct; another defendant’s sentence was further reduced to 48 months at the court’s discretion; and the final defendant who pleaded guilty received a one-third sentence reduction, being sentenced to 44 months. All sentences are to be served concurrently, with no orders for probation or placement in a labour training centre sought. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)

裁判官/法官:

LIN Kam Hung, Ernest

法院:

District Court No. 23

認罪:

沒有

罪成:

Convicted

判刑:

Imprisonment

相近案件