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 stated that on the evening of 1 July 2020, the defendants unlawfully manufactured and placed a chemical smoke device outside the Integration Centre on Hennessy Road in Wan Chai, releasing chlorine-containing toxic white smoke and causing a slight explosion and visible flame. The police, using CCTV footage, identified the defendant carrying a red shopping bag to the scene and entering the fast-food restaurant restroom to mix chemicals, which were subsequently placed in a cardboard box by accomplices for deployment. After the incident, the police recovered a large quantity of chemicals used for producing smoke and explosive reactions from the defendant’s residence and workplace, which experts confirmed could spontaneously generate flames and toxic gas. The defendant denied the charges in court; his defence statements were largely inconsistent with the surveillance evidence, and he was ultimately convicted.
Under common law, the offence of causing a public nuisance requires consideration of whether the conduct is unlawful and endangers the life, health, property, morals, or comfort of the public, or obstructs the public in the exercise of rights common to all. In sentencing, regard was also had to precedents including R v Shorrock, R v Rimmington, and HKSAR v Pearce.
The defendant, together with others, carried and mixed various readily ignitable and toxic chemicals and intentionally released smoke in a public place, likely causing respiratory injuries and public alarm and endangering social safety; the evidence clearly shows the act was deliberate and premeditated.
The defendant’s testimony contained numerous contradictions with the CCTV footage, expert reports, and records of seized evidence, which did not undermine his status as the principal offender or the facts of the crime; the only reasonable conclusion is that he participated in placing the smoke device, which is therefore accepted in convicting him.
The defendant was found guilty of causing a public nuisance. (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 1 July 2020 two defendants illegally placed a chemical smoke device outside Hennessy Road in Wan Chai, releasing sour-smelling white smoke, causing disruption to the protest site and to members of the public passing by. The police cordoned off the scene and seized cartons containing residual chemicals such as cyanuric acid and polyethylene glycol, and, based on CCTV footage, confirmed the two as the installers. The following month, a variety of chemicals capable of producing flames and toxic smoke when mixed were found at their workplace and residence.
The offence of causing a public nuisance carries a maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment. The Court of Appeal has not issued sentencing guidelines. In previous cases, sentences have varied from one month suspended to eighteen months’ immediate imprisonment, depending on the circumstances.
Given that the act could induce panic and impose a psychological burden on society, and carried substantial harmful potential, immediate imprisonment was necessary for deterrence. The starting point of the sentence was set at twenty-eight months’ imprisonment. Taking into account that the first defendant pleaded guilty before trial and received a one-quarter reduction, plus a further two-month reduction for good character, he was sentenced to nineteen months’ imprisonment; although the second defendant was convicted after trial, he also received a two-month reduction for good character, resulting in a twenty-six-month sentence.
Although the smoke lasted only briefly, it was still sufficient to provoke panic among the public and was not a harmless prank; the device had been deployed with meticulous planning, and society should not condone such behaviour but must impose stern punishment.
The first defendant, having pleaded guilty before trial and in view of his good character, was sentenced to nineteen months’ imprisonment; the second defendant, also benefiting from a good character reduction, was sentenced to twenty-six months’ imprisonment. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書