Technician involved in the 6.12 assault on the police | The officer did not say whether the defendant was guilty of being hit by a punch or a hand

Social News

Written by: Li Huina

2020-08-04 17:59

In response to the anti-amendment campaign, a large number of demonstrators gathered around the Legislative Council on June 12 last year. A 25-year-old technician was accused of punching the plainclothes policeman’s left neck in a boxing outside the police chief. He denied assaulting a policeman and was tried. After hearing the testimony, the magistrate questioned whether the defendant heard the police officer’s identity at the time of the incident. The police officer who was attacked could not tell whether he was injured by the defendant’s fist or his hand. It was not confirmed that the defendant deliberately carried out the attack, so the defendant was convicted.

The defendant, Zhuang Haofeng, 26, denied a crime of assaulting a police officer. He alleged that he attacked a police officer who was performing his duties at the junction of Arsenal Street and Lockhart Road in Wan Chai on June 12 last year, that is, Senior Inspector Yu Tiansheng.

It's not uncommon to fail to observe between electric light and flint

The magistrate believed that when the attacked police officer approached the defendant, the defendant showed no signs of taking any action. The police officer would not carefully observe the defendant's movements. Moreover, the incident happened in a flashlight room. It is not uncommon for the police officer to be unclear about being attacked by palms or fists. Since both palms and fists have a certain area, the police officer is not sure whether the attacked location is the face or neck, nor does it affect its credibility. I believe it is just a matter of observation.

Questioned whether the defendant heard what the police officer said

However, the police officer who was attacked admitted that he said to the defendant at the time: "Sir, send someone, let me pass." The noise was only "a little louder", not to the defendant. The magistrate questioned whether the defendant really heard the sentence. , And the police officer had not finished the sentence, and the defendant had already acted, thinking that the defendant’s behavior might only be a natural reaction.

Allergic reaction suspicious

Furthermore, the magistrate pointed out that the police officer could not clearly state whether the defendant was throwing a fist or just hitting his hand. The police officer also admitted that the defendant’s strength was only "greater than greeting". The description was neutral, and it could be an attack or an attack. Accident, it is not certain that the defendant deliberately attacked, but if the defendant's behavior is a natural reaction, he also reacted to allergies and be suspicious. Since the prosecution failed to provide evidence to the point of no reasonable doubt, the defendant was found acquitted.

Case Number: ESCC2304/2019

Fugitive Offenders Ordinance | Youth involved in the Sha Tin conflict with an umbrella attack on a police officer accusing witnesses of discrepancies and found guilty

Clerk involved in assault on police case | Two police officers describe the location of the assailant, one on the left and the other on the right. The official convicted the defendant

A 60-year-old man involved in pushing a police chest and chin was accused of assaulting a police witness.

Assault on Police 612 Fugitive Offenders Ordinance Demonstration Fugitive Offenders Ordinance related hearing