anti-elab-872 DCCC12/2020 Riot

文件編號:

anti-elab-872

案件編號:

DCCC12/2020

控罪:

Riot

涉事日期 :

2019-08-31

涉事地點 :

Wan Chai

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 31 August 2019, between approximately 6pm and 8pm in rainy conditions, protesters on Hennessy Road and Luya Road on Hong Kong Island successively erected barricades using miscellaneous objects, set them alight and threw petrol bombs, triggering a riot. The police formed two lines to advance and disperse them, and arrested eight defendants opposite Southorn Stadium and on Mathew Street. The defendants were originally charged with unlawful assembly but were later charged with rioting; the fourth defendant was additionally charged with possession of an offensive weapon. All defendants pleaded not guilty. The prosecution relied on video footage and police testimony, while the defence questioned the credibility of witnesses and the lack of direct evidence of participation.

According to Section 19 (rioting) and Section 33 (possession of an offensive weapon) of the Public Order Ordinance, the prosecution must prove the defendants’ involvement in the rioting and the fact of weapon possession beyond reasonable doubt.

Given that the prosecution failed to provide evidence of the defendants’ actual rioting before arrest, that police testimony in many respects did not match the video footage or police notes, and that indirect evidence such as clothing and location at the scene was insufficient to eliminate reasonable doubt, there was not enough basis for conviction.

The judge held that the prosecution’s argument was insufficient, and it could not be established that the defendants had acted together to disrupt public order; he therefore expressed reservations about the officers’ testimony and identification evidence.

After trial and analysis of the evidence, the court determined that the prosecution had failed to prove the defendants’ guilt beyond reasonable doubt, ruled that the rioting charges against the eight defendants and the weapons possession charge against the fourth defendant were not established, dismissed all the charges, and declared the defendants not guilty. (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

No Reasons for sentence. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)

Case Details

File No. anti-elab-872
Case No. DCCC12/2020
Judge Shum Kei-leong Timon
Court District Court
Plea Plead not guilty
Verdict Not convicted
Charge Riot
Incident Date 2019-08-31
Incident Location Wan Chai
Reasons for Verdict View
Reasons for Verdict (AI Summary) The judgment states that on 31 August 2019, between approximately 6pm and 8pm in rainy conditions, protesters on Hennessy Road and Luya Road on Hong Kong Island successively erected barricades using miscellaneous objects, set them alight and threw petrol bombs, triggering a riot. The police formed two lines to advance and disperse them, and arrested eight defendants opposite Southorn Stadium and on Mathew Street. The defendants were originally charged with unlawful assembly but were later charged with rioting; the fourth defendant was additionally charged with possession of an offensive weapon. All defendants pleaded not guilty. The prosecution relied on video footage and police testimony, while the defence questioned the credibility of witnesses and the lack of direct evidence of participation.</p><p>According to Section 19 (rioting) and Section 33 (possession of an offensive weapon) of the Public Order Ordinance, the prosecution must prove the defendants' involvement in the rioting and the fact of weapon possession beyond reasonable doubt.</p><p>Given that the prosecution failed to provide evidence of the defendants' actual rioting before arrest, that police testimony in many respects did not match the video footage or police notes, and that indirect evidence such as clothing and location at the scene was insufficient to eliminate reasonable doubt, there was not enough basis for conviction.</p><p>The judge held that the prosecution's argument was insufficient, and it could not be established that the defendants had acted together to disrupt public order; he therefore expressed reservations about the officers' testimony and identification evidence.</p><p>After trial and analysis of the evidence, the court determined that the prosecution had failed to prove the defendants' guilt beyond reasonable doubt, ruled that the rioting charges against the eight defendants and the weapons possession charge against the fourth defendant were not established, dismissed all the charges, and declared the defendants not guilty. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
Reasons for Sentence (AI Summary) No Reasons for sentence. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)

裁判官/法官:

Shum Kei-leong Timon

法院:

District Court

認罪:

Plead not guilty

罪成:

Not convicted

判刑:

沒有

相近案件