anti-elab-3030 DCCC475/2020 Wilful obstruction of police officer in due execution of duty

文件編號:

anti-elab-3030

案件編號:

DCCC475/2020

控罪:

Wilful obstruction of police officer in due execution of duty

涉事日期 :

2019-11-11

涉事地點 :

Sai Wan Ho

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 notes that this case originated during the citywide ‘Triple Strike’ protests on 11 November 2019. While patrolling at the junction of Tai On Street and Shau Kei Wan Road in Sai Wan Ho, police discovered the road was blocked by protesters and a crowd had gathered. When the on-duty officer drew his firearm to stop those obstructing the road and attempted to untie a rope fastened to a lamp post, he was attacked from both front and back by several people, including the two defendants, who tried to seize his service weapon. The officer then fired three shots at the scene; one struck one defendant in the abdomen, the other two missed. The two were subsequently subdued and arrested, and one also attempted to escape custody.

Under Section 36(b) of the Offences against the Person Ordinance, intentionally obstructing police officers may be punished by up to 2 years’ imprisonment; under Section 10 of the Theft Ordinance and Section 159G of the Crimes Ordinance, attempted robbery may be punished by up to life imprisonment; under Section 101I of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, attempting to escape lawful custody must also be penalised.

The two defendants deliberately obstructed police officers in the execution of their duties during an unlawful assembly, conspired to seize the officer’s service weapon, and one of them sustained serious injuries. Their conduct was severe and warrants punishment that has a deterrent effect and provides social protection.

The judge held that the prosecution’s evidence was complete and reliable, the video footage was consistent with the officer’s testimony, and the conduct of the two defendants clearly constituted all the charges, leaving no reasonable doubt and making conviction all but inevitable.

Defendant One and Defendant Two were both convicted on counts one and two, and Defendant One was also convicted on count three; the sentence will be announced at a later date. (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 11 November 2019 the defendant participated in the ‘Triple Strike’ protest, and with others blocked roads in Shau Kei Wan, paralyzing traffic. On that day a police officer attended alone to disperse the obstruction, was attacked from front and rear by the defendants, who attempted to seize his service pistol; the officer drew his weapon and fired, striking one of the defendants and causing serious injury. Afterwards, the two defendants were charged with wilful obstruction of duty and attempted robbery, and the first defendant was additionally charged with attempted escape. Following trial, they were both convicted.

Wilful obstruction of duty: referring to similar District Court cases, sentencing starting point 12 months’ imprisonment; attempted robbery: under the ‘Mao Kwong-sang’ armed robbery guideline and the aggravating factors in this case, sentencing starting point six years’ imprisonment; attempted escape: no specific guideline, referring to the Muhammad Waqas case, sentencing starting point six months’ imprisonment.

The defendants acted in concert to provoke and attack a police officer on solo duty, attempting to seize his firearm, openly challenging law enforcement authority; the first defendant’s escape attempt was calculated; both defendants showed no remorse, and their health and family circumstances do not constitute mitigating factors.

The judge emphasised that Hong Kong’s rule-of-law society does not tolerate violence against law enforcement personnel, and that other cases have limited reference value; sentencing must be tailored to the circumstances of each case to maintain public order and enforcement safety.

Both Defendant One and Defendant Two were each sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment for wilful obstruction of duty and six years’ imprisonment for attempted robbery, and Defendant One was additionally sentenced to six months’ imprisonment for attempted escape; all sentences are to run concurrently, resulting in a total term of six years’ imprisonment. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)

查看完整判刑理由書

Case Details

File No. anti-elab-3030
Case No. DCCC475/2020
Judge Mrs. TSE CHING Adriana Noelle
Court District Court No. 6
Verdict Convicted
Charge Wilful obstruction of police officer in due execution of duty
Sentence Imprisonment
Incident Date 2019-11-11
Incident Location Sai Wan Ho
Reasons for Verdict View
Reasons for Verdict (AI Summary) The judgment notes that this case originated during the citywide 'Triple Strike' protests on 11 November 2019. While patrolling at the junction of Tai On Street and Shau Kei Wan Road in Sai Wan Ho, police discovered the road was blocked by protesters and a crowd had gathered. When the on-duty officer drew his firearm to stop those obstructing the road and attempted to untie a rope fastened to a lamp post, he was attacked from both front and back by several people, including the two defendants, who tried to seize his service weapon. The officer then fired three shots at the scene; one struck one defendant in the abdomen, the other two missed. The two were subsequently subdued and arrested, and one also attempted to escape custody.</p><p>Under Section 36(b) of the Offences against the Person Ordinance, intentionally obstructing police officers may be punished by up to 2 years' imprisonment; under Section 10 of the Theft Ordinance and Section 159G of the Crimes Ordinance, attempted robbery may be punished by up to life imprisonment; under Section 101I of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, attempting to escape lawful custody must also be penalised.</p><p>The two defendants deliberately obstructed police officers in the execution of their duties during an unlawful assembly, conspired to seize the officer's service weapon, and one of them sustained serious injuries. Their conduct was severe and warrants punishment that has a deterrent effect and provides social protection.</p><p>The judge held that the prosecution's evidence was complete and reliable, the video footage was consistent with the officer's testimony, and the conduct of the two defendants clearly constituted all the charges, leaving no reasonable doubt and making conviction all but inevitable.</p><p>Defendant One and Defendant Two were both convicted on counts one and two, and Defendant One was also convicted on count three; the sentence will be announced at a later date. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
Reasons for Sentence View
Reasons for Sentence (AI Summary) The judgment states that on 11 November 2019 the defendant participated in the 'Triple Strike' protest, and with others blocked roads in Shau Kei Wan, paralyzing traffic. On that day a police officer attended alone to disperse the obstruction, was attacked from front and rear by the defendants, who attempted to seize his service pistol; the officer drew his weapon and fired, striking one of the defendants and causing serious injury. Afterwards, the two defendants were charged with wilful obstruction of duty and attempted robbery, and the first defendant was additionally charged with attempted escape. Following trial, they were both convicted.</p><p>Wilful obstruction of duty: referring to similar District Court cases, sentencing starting point 12 months' imprisonment; attempted robbery: under the 'Mao Kwong-sang' armed robbery guideline and the aggravating factors in this case, sentencing starting point six years' imprisonment; attempted escape: no specific guideline, referring to the Muhammad Waqas case, sentencing starting point six months' imprisonment.</p><p>The defendants acted in concert to provoke and attack a police officer on solo duty, attempting to seize his firearm, openly challenging law enforcement authority; the first defendant's escape attempt was calculated; both defendants showed no remorse, and their health and family circumstances do not constitute mitigating factors.</p><p>The judge emphasised that Hong Kong's rule-of-law society does not tolerate violence against law enforcement personnel, and that other cases have limited reference value; sentencing must be tailored to the circumstances of each case to maintain public order and enforcement safety.</p><p>Both Defendant One and Defendant Two were each sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment for wilful obstruction of duty and six years' imprisonment for attempted robbery, and Defendant One was additionally sentenced to six months' imprisonment for attempted escape; all sentences are to run concurrently, resulting in a total term of six years' imprisonment. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)

裁判官/法官:

Mrs. TSE CHING Adriana Noelle

法院:

District Court No. 6

認罪:

沒有

罪成:

Convicted

判刑:

Imprisonment

相近案件