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。
Judgment states that on 29 September 2019, hundreds of individuals dressed in black demonstrated outside the Government Headquarters in Admiralty, where the protest escalated into a riot, with petrol bombs and debris thrown to smash glass, and after multiple warnings the police dispersed them on Harcourt Road. Three defendants were arrested by officers. Defendant One claimed they entered a public toilet to wash their eyes because of tear gas; Defendant Three said they were making a field recording; Defendant Nine, heavily equipped, was carrying medical supplies. The court, considering CCTV footage and police testimony, found that all three had participated in the riot, and the assault on an officer charge against Defendant Nine was not upheld.
In accordance with the Criminal Offences Ordinance and case law sentencing guidelines on the offence of riot, the degree of violence, the circumstances of participation and the character of the defendant were taken into account.
The defendants disregarded repeated warnings, took part in or supported destructive behaviour, thereby disrupting public order; although there was no evidence that Defendant Nine assaulted an officer, his heavy equipment also reflected the malicious nature of his complicity.
The judge considered that the defendant knowingly acted unlawfully during the riot, exhibiting subjective intent; the charge of assaulting an officer was dismissed due to insufficient evidence.
Defendant One, Defendant Three and Defendant Nine were all convicted of riot, with the assault on an officer charge dismissed; the sentence will be announced separately. (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。
Judgment states that on 29 September 2019 about twenty thousand protesters assembled in Causeway Bay and marched to the Government Headquarters outside Admiralty. During this period, some protesters blocked roads, formed umbrella barricades, and threw petrol bombs and bricks, escalating into a serious riot. The police issued multiple warnings and used water cannon and tear gas to disperse the crowds, yet were unable to stop around five hundred protesters from gathering. Six defendants participated in the riot on site and were arrested during the clashes, later pleading guilty to riot charges.
The maximum penalty for riot is ten years’ imprisonment; there is no specific guideline. The Court of Appeal in a related case set out twelve sentencing considerations, including the number of participants, level of violence, duration, threat to society, the defendant’s role and degree of involvement.
The court took into account the defendants’ specific conduct and equipment used in the riot, the symbolic significance of the target, the scale of the riot and its social impact as aggravating factors; and weighed mitigating factors such as the defendants’ age, health, first-time offender status, plea, genuine remorse and community service, to balance the purposes of punishment and rehabilitation.
The judge considered this case a social tragedy. Many of the defendants were young people with no prior convictions who lost their rationality in the group atmosphere and were manipulated by instigators behind the scenes. A deterrent sentence is therefore required, while also taking into account the defendants’ sincere remorse and determination to reform.
Based on each defendant’s role and the mitigating circumstances, the court sentenced four defendants to thirty-six months’ imprisonment, one defendant to thirty months; the youngest defendant was placed in a training centre. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書