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。
According to the judgment, on 29 September 2019 large-scale protests broke out in the Causeway Bay to Admiralty area, escalating into a riot. The police issued multiple broadcast warnings and deployed water cannon and tear gas to disperse the crowds. The first defendant claimed he had intended to attend an art exhibition in Central but, affected by tear gas, entered the Admiralty public toilet to wash his eyes; during that time two men dressed in black forced their way in, and were arrested upon leaving the toilet. The third defendant said he was at the scene to record ‘field audio’ and was arrested after falling during the dispersal. The ninth defendant arrived at the scene equipped with a helmet, gas mask, saline solution, bandages and other heavy gear, and struggled while resisting arrest during the dispersal. The prosecution relied on CCTV footage, police testimony and online video clips to establish that all three were at the heart of the riot, charging each with rioting; the ninth defendant was also charged with assaulting a police officer, but that charge was ultimately not upheld due to insufficient evidence.
Based on the sentencing guidelines for rioting established in HKSAR v. Lo Kin-man, which assess the scale of the riot, the degree of violence and the roles played by the defendants.
It was considered that all three defendants had remained at a scene of serious violence and in various ways supported or amplified the rioters’ momentum, disrupting social peace and warranting punitive and deterrent measures; however, their backgrounds, prior convictions and attitudes to pleading guilty differed, allowing for discretionary mitigation.
The judge remarked that a riot is akin to an urban battlefield and participants fuel violence; without severe punishment it may be difficult to curb similar incidents, yet it is also necessary to tailor penalties to individual circumstances.
Defendant 1 was sentenced to 24 months’ imprisonment due to a relatively minor role; Defendant 3, having both an interest in recording and presence at the scene, was sentenced to 30 months’ imprisonment; Defendant 9, fully equipped and resisting arrest, was sentenced to 42 months’ imprisonment; the assault charge against Defendant 9 was not upheld. (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 since June 2019, a series of illegal demonstrations broke out in Hong Kong. On 29 September 2019, about 20,000 people marched from Causeway Bay to outside Government Headquarters. Approximately 500 people, including the defendants, gathered around Harcourt Road and Tim Wa Avenue, occupying footbridges and roads, using umbrellas and large slingshots for cover, and hurled petrol bombs, bricks, and hard objects at police lines and the Government Headquarters, wantonly damaging traffic facilities; after warnings and dispersal by water cannon and tear gas, they still refused to leave. The police then launched dispersal and arrest operations from multiple exits, charging the six defendants with rioting.
The maximum penalty for rioting is ten years’ imprisonment. There is no fixed sentencing guideline. The Court of Appeal has listed twelve factors to consider, including the number of participants, the level of violence, duration, degree of threat, organisation, and the role of the defendant.
This Bench took into account each defendant’s level of participation and mitigation: the starting point for four defendants was four years, reduced by 25% to 36 months; the starting point for one defendant was four years, reduced by 25% and further reduced by six months at the court’s discretion, resulting in 30 months; the remaining defendant, due to youth and on the recommendation of the training centre report, was committed to a training centre.
The judge considered that the six defendants merely followed the crowd, lacked rational judgement, and had no genuine political mission, only playing the role of participants. However, their actions, in cooperation with large organised rioting groups, disrupted social order and warranted a deterrent sentence, and he noted that there may be hidden instigators who have not been held to account.
In the end, due to the defendants’ ages and the recommendation of the training centre report, the court ordered one defendant to be committed to a training centre; the other four defendants, considering their level of participation and guilty pleas, were sentenced to 36 months’ imprisonment; and one defendant, given his role and mitigation, was sentenced to 30 months’ imprisonment. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書