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 6 July 2019, outside Tuen Mun Police Station, Witness X was surrounded and threatened by protesters who suspected that his mobile phone contained photographs of protesters from 1 July, and demanded that he hand over his phone and delete the photos. Defendant 1, in his capacity as a councillor, arrived on the scene attempting to mediate; Defendant 3, as a live-streaming journalist, filmed the incident; Defendant 4, as a social worker, assisted in examining the phone. X had previously been assaulted, and after passing through several hands the phone was handed to Defendant 4 for safekeeping and inspection. The three face charges of perverting the course of justice, unauthorised access to a computer, dishonest access to a computer, criminal damage, and unlawful assembly, all of which they deny.
The judge held that to establish a conviction, it must be proven that the defendants’ actions had a discernible connection and subjective intent in relation to a potential or actual legal process, and the evidence must be assessed on the beyond reasonable doubt standard. For the offences of dishonest access to a computer and criminal damage, it must be confirmed that data was deleted and that there was intent; for unlawful assembly, it must be proven that there was an intent to participate and that the conduct disrupted public order or was intimidating.
The judge considered that Defendants 1 and 4 were merely providing assistance and protecting the witness at the time, with no intent to pervert justice or act dishonestly; Defendant 3, however, joined in the coercive surround at the scene through words and actions, meeting the requirements for unlawful assembly, and there was insufficient evidence for the other charges.
The judge emphasised that the defendants’ intent must be inferred from the complete video footage, following rigorous evidentiary standards and the principle of identifiable connection to ensure a fair trial.
All charges against Defendants 1 and 4 were dismissed; they were found not guilty and released at once. Defendant 3 was convicted of unlawful assembly and sentenced to eight weeks’ imprisonment. (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 afternoon of 6 July 2019, the defendant spontaneously gathered outside Tuen Mun Police Station with dozens of protesters who had earlier participated in a lawful march, surrounding Mr X, who was believed to have photographed protesters outside Police Headquarters, and demanding he hand over and delete the photos on his phone. During this process, the defendant stopped filming, joined the group of besiegers, and used menacing language to pressure the witness. After trial, the court determined that the defendant had actively participated in the assembly during the siege and uttered threatening remarks, thereby constituting unlawful assembly.
The offence of unlawful assembly carries a maximum sentence of five years’ imprisonment upon conviction by indictment; in sentencing, reference must be made to the appellate court’s established considerations for riot or unlawful assembly cases, including premeditation, number of participants, use of violence or weapons, duration, impact on public order, the individual’s role and level of participation, and so on.
This case involved a spontaneous unlawful assembly of dozens of participants, with no evidence of weapon use, and the witness was surrounded for as long as an hour; however, the defendant actually participated for only about ten minutes, during which he stopped filming but used threatening language to bolster the besiegers’ morale, intensifying the pressure on Mr X. The unlawful assembly affected traffic and public order, and there was no evidence of repeated police warnings, warranting severe punishment to serve as a deterrent.
The judge held that although the defendant did not inflict actual physical violence and even attempted to protect the witness, his intimidating words and conduct reinforced the unlawful assembly, and there were insufficient mitigating factors to reduce his sentence, making immediate imprisonment necessary.
Following trial, the defendant was convicted of unlawful assembly and, in the absence of any reduction for a guilty plea, was sentenced to immediate imprisonment for thirteen months. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書