anti-elab-375 DCCC372/2020 Arson

文件編號:

anti-elab-375

案件編號:

DCCC372/2020

控罪:

Arson

涉事日期 :

2019-11-03

涉事地點 :

Mong Kok

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

No Reasons for Verdict.

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 2 and 3 November 2019, several thousand protesters gathered in Tsim Sha Tsui before retreating to Mong Kok, where hundreds assembled at Nathan Road and Argyle Street. Barricades of railings, signs and rubbish blocked traffic and, at around 2:00 am, a fire was ignited near Nathan Road by unknown persons. The Defendant was observed adding garbage to that fire, then later placing Styrofoam boxes and wooden pallets onto a blaze outside exit C1 of the Mong Kok MTR station, causing damage estimated at HK$10,400. The station was closed at the time. The Defendant was arrested on 31 December 2019, admitted his participation and motive “for fun,” cooperated fully with police, pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity, and offered full restitution.

The court applied the principles in HKSAR v Leung Tin Kei [2020] 4 HKLRD 462: maintaining the rule of law and public order; punishment and deterrence requiring immediate custody for violent unlawful assembly or riot; the offender’s rationale is not mitigating; and that riot’s gravamen is large numbers acting with violence to achieve a common purpose.

Aggravating factors included the use of fire to block roads and damage public property during a period of heightened civil unrest; the deliberate acceleration of flames; and the serious risk to public order. Mitigating factors were the Defendant’s youth (19 at the time), lack of prior convictions, minor role without weapons or injuries, early guilty plea and full cooperation with investigators, genuine remorse, responsible family contributions, and payment of full restitution of HK$10,400.

The judge held that a custodial sentence was necessary for deterrence and upholding the rule of law and that a Training Centre order would be inappropriate. He identified a starting point of 63 months’ imprisonment, applied a one-third discount for the guilty plea and a further three-month reduction for restitution, resulting in 39 months’ imprisonment.

The Defendant is sentenced to 39 months’ imprisonment. A compensation order of HK$10,400 is made, to be satisfied from bail funds with any balance refunded to the Defendant or his representative.

查看完整判刑理由書

Case Details

File No. anti-elab-375
Case No. DCCC372/2020
Judge CASEWELL Timothy Harry
Court District Court
Verdict Discontinuation
Charge Arson
Incident Date 2019-11-03
Incident Location Mong Kok
Reasons for Verdict (AI Summary) No Reasons for Verdict.
Reasons for Sentence View
Reasons for Sentence (AI Summary) The judgment states that on 2 and 3 November 2019, several thousand protesters gathered in Tsim Sha Tsui before retreating to Mong Kok, where hundreds assembled at Nathan Road and Argyle Street. Barricades of railings, signs and rubbish blocked traffic and, at around 2:00 am, a fire was ignited near Nathan Road by unknown persons. The Defendant was observed adding garbage to that fire, then later placing Styrofoam boxes and wooden pallets onto a blaze outside exit C1 of the Mong Kok MTR station, causing damage estimated at HK$10,400. The station was closed at the time. The Defendant was arrested on 31 December 2019, admitted his participation and motive “for fun,” cooperated fully with police, pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity, and offered full restitution.</p><p>The court applied the principles in HKSAR v Leung Tin Kei [2020] 4 HKLRD 462: maintaining the rule of law and public order; punishment and deterrence requiring immediate custody for violent unlawful assembly or riot; the offender’s rationale is not mitigating; and that riot’s gravamen is large numbers acting with violence to achieve a common purpose.</p><p>Aggravating factors included the use of fire to block roads and damage public property during a period of heightened civil unrest; the deliberate acceleration of flames; and the serious risk to public order. Mitigating factors were the Defendant’s youth (19 at the time), lack of prior convictions, minor role without weapons or injuries, early guilty plea and full cooperation with investigators, genuine remorse, responsible family contributions, and payment of full restitution of HK$10,400.</p><p>The judge held that a custodial sentence was necessary for deterrence and upholding the rule of law and that a Training Centre order would be inappropriate. He identified a starting point of 63 months’ imprisonment, applied a one-third discount for the guilty plea and a further three-month reduction for restitution, resulting in 39 months’ imprisonment.</p><p>The Defendant is sentenced to 39 months’ imprisonment. A compensation order of HK$10,400 is made, to be satisfied from bail funds with any balance refunded to the Defendant or his representative.

裁判官/法官:

CASEWELL Timothy Harry

法院:

District Court

認罪:

沒有

罪成:

Discontinuation

判刑:

沒有

相近案件