🏛District Court36 #DCC36
👩🏻⚖️Ms WONG Sze Lai, Lily (District Judge) #WONGSLL
#Sentence
#20190811TsimShaTsui #Riot
D1: LEE(27)/ D2: X(14)
D3: LIU(25)/ D4: CHONG(24)
D6: NIP(24)/ D7: WONG(21)
D8: LO(19)/ D10: POON(26)
D11: LAW(22)
Charges:
(1) Riot
Contrary to s.19(1) and (2) of the Public Order Ordinance, Cap. 245
All defendants were charged that on August 11, 2019, at the vicinity of Nathan Rd. between Austin Rd. and Humphreys Avenue, with other persons unknown, took part in a riot.
(2) Possession of ammunition without a licence
Contrary to s.13(1) and (2) of the Firearms and Ammunition Ordinance, Cap.238
D11: LAW(22) was charged that on August 11, 2019, at 132 Nathan Rd., Tsim Sha Tsui, Kowloon, Hong Kong, possessed ammunition without a licence, namely nine used tear gas.
—————————
Reasons for sentence
📌Background
This case has 11 defendants (D1-11), D1 and D6 pleaded guilty to Charge 1 during the pre-trial review #PTR hearing. D5 LO(21) failed to appear after #PTR hearing. D9 SIU(23) was acquitted by trial, whilst other defendants were convicted.
📌Reasons for sentence
Regarding Charge 1, Court of Appeal listed 12 factors, in CACC164/2018, that can be taken into account when passing sentence on the offence of riot. In this case, the Court finds: (1) The scale of the riot was large. The riot took place at downtown area; (2) The number of protestors engaged in the riot was hundreds to a thousandish; (3) The duration of the riot lasted about around 2 hours. Protestors also ignored many police warnings; (4) 1 police officerr injured (his legs suffered second degree burn) and some properties were damaged (i.e. bus stop billboards); (5) The imminence and gravity of threat against citizens, reporters and police officers were large; (6) The traffic was impeded due to protestors blocked the road; (7) D11 committed Charge 2 during the riot; (8) Especially D1 and D6, they actively participated the riot. Video footages show that D1 tried to put off the tear gas and stayed inside an array of umbrellas; D6 pushed down the high platform with other protestors and stayed inside an array of umbrellas; (9) Some bricks damaged by protestors; (10) All defendants were planned to participated the riot as they wore "black bloc" and facial covering, and brought equipment and other clothes to change; and (11) The degree of violence used by protestors was large. For example, they used laser pointer to attack police officers, throwing solid objects, tear gases and total 2 petrol bombs to police station, chanting political slogans and cursed police officers, blocking the road to impede traffic.
Regarding Charge 2, according to CACC222/1992, Court of Appeal stressed that the seriousness of possession of ammunition is less than firearms. The Court also considers the type and number of used tear gases. Whilst the used tear gas could not threaten the society.
Regarding D1 and D6, the Court adopts 4 years and 8 months' imprisonment as a starting point. As they pleaded guilty to the charge at pre-trial review hearing , the Court offers 25% sentence reduction. The Court also reduces D1's sentence by 2 months because she keen on public welfare and social activities. Therefore, the sentence of D1 and D6 are 3 years and 4 months' imprisonment and 3 years and 6 months' imprisonment‼️
Regarding D2, after considering the facts and D2's age at the time of the offence (14), also referring to training centre report, the Court sentences D2 to training centre #TC‼️
Regarding D11, the Court adopts 4 years and 2 months' imprisonment and 9 months' imprisonment as a starting point of Charges 1 and 2. The Court orders 2 months of Charge 2 to be served consecutively to the sentence of Charge 1 and to balance concurrently. As D11 has no commutation factors, the final sentence of D11 is 4 years and 4 months' imprisonment‼️
As for the other defendants, the Court adopts 4 years and 2 months' imprisonment as a starting point. Without mitigation factors, the final sentence of them is 4 years and 2 months' imprisonment‼️
👩🏻⚖️Ms WONG Sze Lai, Lily (District Judge) #WONGSLL
#Sentence
#20190811TsimShaTsui #Riot
D1: LEE(27)/ D2: X(14)
D3: LIU(25)/ D4: CHONG(24)
D6: NIP(24)/ D7: WONG(21)
D8: LO(19)/ D10: POON(26)
D11: LAW(22)
Charges:
(1) Riot
Contrary to s.19(1) and (2) of the Public Order Ordinance, Cap. 245
All defendants were charged that on August 11, 2019, at the vicinity of Nathan Rd. between Austin Rd. and Humphreys Avenue, with other persons unknown, took part in a riot.
(2) Possession of ammunition without a licence
Contrary to s.13(1) and (2) of the Firearms and Ammunition Ordinance, Cap.238
D11: LAW(22) was charged that on August 11, 2019, at 132 Nathan Rd., Tsim Sha Tsui, Kowloon, Hong Kong, possessed ammunition without a licence, namely nine used tear gas.
—————————
Reasons for sentence
📌Background
This case has 11 defendants (D1-11), D1 and D6 pleaded guilty to Charge 1 during the pre-trial review #PTR hearing. D5 LO(21) failed to appear after #PTR hearing. D9 SIU(23) was acquitted by trial, whilst other defendants were convicted.
📌Reasons for sentence
Regarding Charge 1, Court of Appeal listed 12 factors, in CACC164/2018, that can be taken into account when passing sentence on the offence of riot. In this case, the Court finds: (1) The scale of the riot was large. The riot took place at downtown area; (2) The number of protestors engaged in the riot was hundreds to a thousandish; (3) The duration of the riot lasted about around 2 hours. Protestors also ignored many police warnings; (4) 1 police officerr injured (his legs suffered second degree burn) and some properties were damaged (i.e. bus stop billboards); (5) The imminence and gravity of threat against citizens, reporters and police officers were large; (6) The traffic was impeded due to protestors blocked the road; (7) D11 committed Charge 2 during the riot; (8) Especially D1 and D6, they actively participated the riot. Video footages show that D1 tried to put off the tear gas and stayed inside an array of umbrellas; D6 pushed down the high platform with other protestors and stayed inside an array of umbrellas; (9) Some bricks damaged by protestors; (10) All defendants were planned to participated the riot as they wore "black bloc" and facial covering, and brought equipment and other clothes to change; and (11) The degree of violence used by protestors was large. For example, they used laser pointer to attack police officers, throwing solid objects, tear gases and total 2 petrol bombs to police station, chanting political slogans and cursed police officers, blocking the road to impede traffic.
Regarding Charge 2, according to CACC222/1992, Court of Appeal stressed that the seriousness of possession of ammunition is less than firearms. The Court also considers the type and number of used tear gases. Whilst the used tear gas could not threaten the society.
Regarding D1 and D6, the Court adopts 4 years and 8 months' imprisonment as a starting point. As they pleaded guilty to the charge at pre-trial review hearing , the Court offers 25% sentence reduction. The Court also reduces D1's sentence by 2 months because she keen on public welfare and social activities. Therefore, the sentence of D1 and D6 are 3 years and 4 months' imprisonment and 3 years and 6 months' imprisonment‼️
Regarding D2, after considering the facts and D2's age at the time of the offence (14), also referring to training centre report, the Court sentences D2 to training centre #TC‼️
Regarding D11, the Court adopts 4 years and 2 months' imprisonment and 9 months' imprisonment as a starting point of Charges 1 and 2. The Court orders 2 months of Charge 2 to be served consecutively to the sentence of Charge 1 and to balance concurrently. As D11 has no commutation factors, the final sentence of D11 is 4 years and 4 months' imprisonment‼️
As for the other defendants, the Court adopts 4 years and 2 months' imprisonment as a starting point. Without mitigation factors, the final sentence of them is 4 years and 2 months' imprisonment‼️