anti-elab-3000 DCCC636/2020 Riot

文件編號:

anti-elab-3000

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 noted that in mid-November 2019, the siege of the Polytechnic University incident triggered large-scale demonstrations and confrontations between police and civilians in the heart of Kowloon. The defendants, numbering around one thousand, divided tasks and cooperated, successively setting up roadblocks and throwing petrol bombs and bricks at multiple locations including Gascoigne Road and Nathan Road, leading to fierce clashes with the police, causing traffic paralysis and public panic. Ten defendants were charged respectively with rioting and possession of offensive weapons; all were convicted except for one whose charges were not upheld.

The maximum penalty for riot offences is 10 years’ imprisonment; however, according to the precedent set in Attorney General v Tse Ka-wah and others, the starting point for sentencing is five years’ imprisonment, with upward adjustments depending on the severity of the case. Sentencing principles focus on deterring collective violence and destructive behaviour, while also considering the individual defendant’s background and remorse.

Most defendants were young, with no previous convictions, and had good backgrounds and academic records. Nevertheless, their participation in organised riotous actions posed a serious challenge to public tranquillity, the rule of law, and public order; although there was individual remorse and letters of mitigation, collective violent offences require strong deterrence, allowing only slight discretionary mitigation.

The judge considers that sentencing must balance the young defendants’ chance of rehabilitation with the public interest, prioritising the maintenance of social tranquillity and the rule of law over individual circumstances, with limited scope for individual sentence reductions; due consideration is given to the defendants’ positive conduct and backgrounds, but the collective harmfulness of their violent behaviour must not be downplayed.

Ultimately, each defendant was sentenced to between 44 and 56 months’ imprisonment for riot offences and related ancillary charges, all of which are to be served immediately. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)

查看完整判刑理由書

Case Details

File No. anti-elab-3000
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 noted that in mid-November 2019, the siege of the Polytechnic University incident triggered large-scale demonstrations and confrontations between police and civilians in the heart of Kowloon. The defendants, numbering around one thousand, divided tasks and cooperated, successively setting up roadblocks and throwing petrol bombs and bricks at multiple locations including Gascoigne Road and Nathan Road, leading to fierce clashes with the police, causing traffic paralysis and public panic. Ten defendants were charged respectively with rioting and possession of offensive weapons; all were convicted except for one whose charges were not upheld.</p><p>The maximum penalty for riot offences is 10 years' imprisonment; however, according to the precedent set in Attorney General v Tse Ka-wah and others, the starting point for sentencing is five years' imprisonment, with upward adjustments depending on the severity of the case. Sentencing principles focus on deterring collective violence and destructive behaviour, while also considering the individual defendant's background and remorse.</p><p>Most defendants were young, with no previous convictions, and had good backgrounds and academic records. Nevertheless, their participation in organised riotous actions posed a serious challenge to public tranquillity, the rule of law, and public order; although there was individual remorse and letters of mitigation, collective violent offences require strong deterrence, allowing only slight discretionary mitigation.</p><p>The judge considers that sentencing must balance the young defendants' chance of rehabilitation with the public interest, prioritising the maintenance of social tranquillity and the rule of law over individual circumstances, with limited scope for individual sentence reductions; due consideration is given to the defendants' positive conduct and backgrounds, but the collective harmfulness of their violent behaviour must not be downplayed.</p><p>Ultimately, each defendant was sentenced to between 44 and 56 months' imprisonment for riot offences and related ancillary charges, all of which are to be served immediately. (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