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 the evening of 31 August 2019, about three hundred protesters dressed in dark clothing illegally assembled in the vicinity of Percival Street and Hennessy Road in Causeway Bay, burned debris, hurled petrol bombs and shone laser lights at the police, seriously disrupting public order; the police successively set up a cordon on Hennessy Road and warnings proved ineffective, then advanced eastward, and arrested the first to seventh defendants on Percival Street and Paterson Street, among whom the first defendant was also charged with the second offence of possessing an unlicensed radio communication device.
The maximum sentence for the offence of rioting is ten years’ imprisonment; the maximum sentence for the offence of possessing an unlicensed radio communication device is two years’ imprisonment.
The first defendant was fully equipped, evaded arrest during the riot, and possessed a walkie-talkie for communication, reflecting serious culpability; the other defendants were implicated solely by indirect evidence, making it difficult to eliminate reasonable doubt, and they should not be convicted as a matter of law.
The judge held that the prosecution’s evidence against the first defendant left no reasonable doubt and was conclusive; as for the second to seventh defendants, the case against them rested solely on inferences from their location, attire and flight, falling short of the standard of no reasonable doubt, and they were not convicted.
The first defendant was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment; the charges against the second to seventh defendants were not established, and they were acquitted. (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 the defendant, between approximately 8:00 pm and 9:06 pm on 31 August 2019, gathered with over 300 protesters and occupied the roadway near No. 1 Jervis Street, Causeway Bay. During the clash, individuals set fires, threw petrol bombs, and shone laser beams at the police. After issuing multiple warnings, the police raised the black flag and advanced their defensive line, ultimately subduing and arresting the defendant on Paterson Street, and discovering an unlicensed radio transceiver on his person.
Pursuant to the Public Order Ordinance, the Telecommunications Ordinance, and the Court of Appeal’s guidelines on riot offences, taking into account factors such as the degree of planning, scale, duration, level of violence, and number of participants involved in the riot.
Given the large scale of the riot, its continuation for over half an hour, and its considerable threat, the starting point for sentencing is 4½ years’ imprisonment; in view of the absence of evidence showing that the defendant personally used violence, that he did not play a leadership or incitement role, his good attitude in pleading guilty, and the saving of judicial resources, and considering his background, the term for the riot offence is reduced to 4 years.
The gravity of the offence of riot lies in the collective conduct of the group, not merely in individual acts; although the defendant was equipped with protective gear and carried a radio transceiver, there is no proof that he led the riot or directly committed violence, so the sentencing reflects a balanced consideration.
The defendant was sentenced to 4 years’ imprisonment for the riot offence; for unlicensed possession of a radio communication device, he was fined 5000 dollars, which may be deducted from his bail. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書