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 during the demonstration on 11 November 2019, the defendant and another person blocked roads in Sai Wan Ho and obstructed Officer A’s crowd-control efforts. The two defendants then attacked the officer from both sides and attempted to seize his service firearm. Officer A then fired three shots in succession; the first shot struck one of the defendants in the abdomen. The two defendants and their accomplices were subsequently subdued and arrested. During transportation to hospital for treatment, the first defendant made a further unsuccessful attempt to escape.
Intentionally obstructing law enforcement officers carries a maximum sentence of two years; attempted robbery can be punished with up to life imprisonment; attempting to escape lawful custody is treated as a common law offence and is sentenced under the relevant statute.
The defendant’s actions involved violence and posed a serious threat to the law enforcement officer; social order and the principle of the rule of law must be upheld. Assaulting an officer and attempting to seize a firearm are serious public prosecution offences that endanger officers’ safety and must be severely punished.
The court finds Officer A’s testimony to be honest and reliable. The defendant acted deliberately, threatened and actually attempted to seize the officer’s firearm, posing a serious threat to public authority and personal safety, leaving no reasonable defence. The seriousness of the case warrants conviction.
Defendant One was found guilty on three charges: intentionally obstructing the lawful execution of duty, attempted robbery and attempted escape from lawful custody; Defendant Two was found guilty on two charges: intentionally obstructing the lawful execution of duty and attempted robbery. (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。
According to the judgement, the defendants participated in a protest roadblock on 11 November 2019. At the scene there was only a single police officer directing traffic. The defendants, together with other individuals in black, followed and provoked the officer, then joined with others in attacking the officer and attempting to seize his service firearm. The officer fired at the defendants who tried to grab the gun, and the first defendant was shot and injured. The two were eventually subdued and arrested, charged respectively with obstruction of law enforcement, attempted robbery (seizure of a police firearm), and the first defendant with an additional offence of escaping from lawful custody. After trial, they were found guilty.
For the offence of obstructing a police officer, having regard to similar cases and the seriousness of the circumstances, the starting point is 12 months’ imprisonment; for the offence of attempted robbery (seizure of a police firearm), pursuant to the guidelines in Mao Guangsheng and others and in light of the consequences of the conduct, the starting point is six years’ imprisonment; for the offence of attempted escape from custody, with reference to the relevant cases, the starting point is six months’ imprisonment.
In a mass demonstration environment, the defendants openly challenged the police’s law enforcement authority, acting like bullies towards the lone officer on duty by using violence and attempting to seize his service firearm. The conduct was serious and premeditated, and there was no remorse or other mitigating factors; a higher sentencing starting point should be adopted.
The judge considered that society does not tolerate violence against law enforcement officers, that the defendants bore responsibility for their own injuries, lacked remorse and any compelling mitigation, and that their conduct endangered public order and the safety of law enforcement; therefore, an immediate custodial sentence is required.
The final ruling was that the three offences of the first defendant and the two offences of the second defendant were all cumulated, resulting in an aggregate sentence of six years’ imprisonment. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書