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 on the evening of 2020年2月29日, at the intersection of Nathan Road and Shan Tung Street in Mong Kok, Kowloon, the assembled crowd had already rioted. Black-clad individuals set up roadblocks and threw bamboo sticks, bricks, and other objects at police vehicles. The first defendant encouraged and assisted people on site by gestures, and the second defendant ran towards a seven-seater riot control vehicle at around 22:50 and is suspected of picking up items to throw. Afterwards they were arrested and tried. Relying on CCTV footage and police testimony, the court found that both had jointly participated in a riot.
Pursuant to Chapter 200 of the Laws of Hong Kong (Public Order Ordinance) and established judicial practice, sentencing must consider the social harm posed by the offence of rioting, the defendant’s intent, and the need to emphasise deterrence.
The first defendant played an instigating and supporting role at the scene, and the second defendant went further by actually attacking a police riot vehicle. Their conduct threatened public order and must be met with severe punishment as a warning to others.
CCTV footage and the testimony of multiple police officers sufficiently establish the identity and actions of the two. The defendants’ explanations were not accepted, and the court considered the evidence reliable, finding participation in a riot.
Both defendants were found guilty, with the riot charges upheld against each. (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 judgment, on the evening of 29 February 2020, a large crowd gathered illegally around the junction of Nathan Road, Shandong Street and Dundas Street in Kowloon to commemorate the so-called 831 incident half-year anniversary. At about 10:38 pm, the police issued a blue flag warning, after which the crowd dispersed and left. At about 10:47 pm, individuals dressed in black blocked the eastern section of Nathan Road; one of the defendants actively observed and encouraged the scene, while the other later picked up debris and threw it at a police van, and, together with others, surrounded and attacked the vehicle, causing damage to it in multiple places. Both defendants were convicted of riot after trial.
The judge referred to the sentencing principles established by the Court of Appeal in the cases of Leung Tin-kei and Tang Ho-yin, including the duration of the riot, the level of violence involved, the impact on society and the role of the defendant in the assembly; and followed the three principles set out in HKSAR v Tang Ho Yin: collective responsibility for group actions, enhanced sentencing for the commission of other offences, and the need for severe punishment for serious violence.
In this case, the riot lasted only slightly over ten seconds, caused no serious injuries, and the property damage was confined to the police seven-seater van. The defendants were neither leaders nor planners and joined on the spot; considering their youth, lack of criminal record, and positive background and references from family and employers, two months were deducted from the three-and-a-half-year starting point.
The judge held that although the circumstances of this case were less serious than those of Leung Tin-kei and Tang Ho-yin, the violence against law enforcement officers was grave and cannot be tolerated; a deterrent sentence is necessary.
Both defendants were each sentenced to three years and four months’ imprisonment. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書