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 judgement stated that on 12 November 2019, from approximately 12:00 to 15:40, thousands of protesters responded to the online ‘Lunch With You’ call, occupying Pedder Street, Des Voeux Road Central and Connaught Road Central in Central. They damaged traffic lights, set fire to create barricades, threw bricks and petrol bombs, and formed an umbrella formation to confront the riot police. The three defendants were each present in the core area of the riot at different times: one collected and transported bricks; one carried a folding umbrella to conceal destructive acts; and one responded to slogans and moved with the crowd, later fleeing into a shopping mall emergency exit with others before being arrested. Two of the defendants also wore masks during the unlawful assembly, allegedly in breach of the Prohibition on Face Coverings Regulation.
Pursuant to section 19 of the Public Order Ordinance (riot offence) and regulation 3(1)(a) of the Prohibition on Face Coverings Regulation, sentencing must consider the degree of disruption to public tranquillity, the defendant’s attitude during the riot, and the cumulative effect of wilful persistence on site and attempts to flee.
The defendants were not innocent bystanders: their actions included collecting and transporting bricks, forming an umbrella formation with others to conceal destructive acts, moving with the crowd and responding to calls, and intending to remain to bolster their numbers. They wore masks and only removed them before arrest, demonstrating an intent to evade investigation. The defence’s reasonable explanations failed, with each defendant’s account seriously contradicted by video evidence.
The court observed that riots are highly fluid and mere presence is insufficient for conviction, but the defendants’ movements, duration of stay, items carried and manner of flight give rise to an irresistible inference of intent to participate in and encourage the riot; their explanations were difficult to reconcile and were thus rejected.
All three defendants were convicted of the offence of riot, and two of the offence of using a facial covering in an unlawful assembly; all other charges were also upheld, and the case proceeded to the sentencing stage. (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 stated that on 12 November 2019, several thousand protesters responded to an online call to blockade roads in Central, paralyzing traffic. During this period, some damaged traffic lights, spray-painted surfaces, shattered bus windows, dismantled railings, dug up bricks to erect barricades, set fires and hurled petrol bombs, and protesters confronted the police in an “umbrella formation”. The defendant participated in the blockade at the scene, twice threw bricks into a traffic tunnel, and while fleeing carried a black cap, a black umbrella and spray-paint cans. He was intercepted and arrested by police near the Landmark.
With reference to the twelve sentencing factors for the offence of rioting established in the Leung Tin-kei case, punishment and deterrence shall guide sentencing, and for the offences of using a mask during an unlawful assembly and possessing articles with intent to damage public property, the statutory terms shall serve as the baseline.
This case constituted serious rioting, affecting Central’s main thoroughfares for over three hours. Although it was not the most severe type, the defendant participated in throwing bricks, blocking roads and confronting aggressive protesters, warranting punishment and deterrence. The defendant’s voluntary surrender and plea of guilt entitle him to a one-third discount, and, based on his lack of prior convictions and genuine remorse, a further reduction of two months. The other two offences had sentencing starting points of six weeks and three months respectively, resulting, after reductions, in actual custodial terms of four weeks and two months.
The defendant neither organised nor incited others, had no record of using spray paint, and caused no personal injury. He was a less serious secondary offender, but still must be penalised for participating in the riot and disrupting public order.
The defendant was sentenced to 30 months’ immediate imprisonment for the offence of rioting; four weeks’ immediate imprisonment for using a mask during an unlawful assembly; and two months’ immediate imprisonment for possession of articles with intent to destroy or damage property, all to run concurrently, totalling 30 months. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書