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 ruling states that the defendants, along with others, during demonstrations on 19 November 2019 in the early hours at Observatory Road in Kowloon, Hong Kong, and the surrounding areas of Chatham Road South, Kimberley Street and Hau Fook Street, repeatedly threw bricks and petrol bomb devices affixed with gas canisters at police lines, disrupting social order. The police launched a clearance operation at around 3 a.m., and some protesters fled into the tong lau at 7-7A Hau Fook Street; eleven people, including the three defendants, were arrested. Evidence, including multiple CCTV clips, screenshots, witness statements, and facts agreed by both prosecution and defence, showed that the defendants at the scene were equipped with helmets, gas masks, face masks, saline solution, cable ties and incendiary materials, and they evaded police pursuit. The defence asserted that the defendants were merely passing by or following in panic, but the judge accepted the prosecution’s arguments, finding that the defendants had intentionally armed themselves and remained with the crowd to support and encourage riotous behaviour through their numbers, and convicted them of rioting.
Under Section 19 of the Public Order Ordinance for the offence of rioting, the maximum penalty is 10 years’ imprisonment; sentencing must take into account the defendants’ roles in the riot, the equipment they carried and the degree of danger posed to public order.
The defendants were not bystanders; they had intentionally equipped themselves and moved around the riot scene, using the strength of the crowd to support and encourage rioters, posing a serious threat to public safety. The evidence was detailed and reliable, meeting the elements of a participatory offence.
The judge found the prosecution’s evidence to be sufficient, the three defendants’ intentions clear and their actions consistent; they were not innocent passers-by or panicked followers, and thus convicted of rioting.
The three defendants were all found guilty of rioting, and sentencing hearings will be scheduled in due course. (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。
The judgment states that, on 19 November 2019, the three defendants responded to an online call to “besiege Wei to rescue Zhao” by going to the Tsim Sha Tsui area from Observatory Road in Kowloon to Chatham Road South, Kimberley Street, and Hau Fook Street, intending to divert the police from the siege of the Polytechnic University. Knowing that there were already acts of public disorder at the scene, they still carried equipment such as masks, normal saline, gas masks, plastic ties, and swimming goggles, and moved with the rioting crowd, and were ultimately arrested by the police on the staircase and rooftop of a tenement building at Nos. 7 to 7A Hau Fook Street.
There are no specific sentencing guidelines for the offence of riot. The court must determine the starting point of the sentence by considering the nature of the crime, the degree of participation, the level of violence, the scale, the impact on the public, and precedents, while also taking into account the rehabilitation needs of young offenders.
Although the three defendants did not appear to have engaged in direct violence, they deliberately armed themselves to join the riot, effectively expressing approval of and support for violent acts, which warrants punitive and deterrent measures; at the same time, considering their youth, first-time offender status, absence of a criminal record, and the report’s recommendation for appropriate correction at a training centre, a training centre order is appropriate.
Rioting is absolutely inexcusable, and those who support it must be suitably punished; for young offenders, sentencing must balance social deterrence with rehabilitative functions, and a training centre order is more proportionate than direct imprisonment.
The court set the starting point for the sentence for the offence of riot at 35 months’ imprisonment. It sentenced the 25-year-old defendant to 35 months’ immediate imprisonment; for the two defendants who were only 16 and 17 years old at the time of the incident, based on the training centre report’s recommendation and their rehabilitation needs, it ordered detention in a training centre with 36 months’ supervision, in lieu of immediate imprisonment. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書