Social News
Written by: Lin Leer
2020-10-06 15:25
Last update date: 2020-10-06 15:49
A college student was hunted down during the "Three Strikes" incident in Tsing Yi last November. A string of hexagonal keys was found in his pocket.
He denied blocking roads and possessing offensive weapons or tools suitable for illegal purposes. He was found guilty of two guilt after trial. He was sentenced in West Kowloon Court today (6th).
Magistrate Peng Liangting stated that possession of offensive weapons is a serious crime and must be sentenced to imprisonment.
He also emphasized the need to deter the public from imitating and maintain social peace, and eventually sentenced the defendant to a rehabilitation center.
The defendant applied for bail pending an appeal against his conviction, but the magistrate rejected his bail application.
The defendant Chen Dongcheng (18 years old, university student) was originally charged with two counts of "possession of a tool suitable for illegal use" and "causing obstruction in a public place". He alleged that he was in charge at the Tamganshan Interchange in Tsing Yi on November 13 last year. Has a hexagonal spoon; and blocked the Dangan mountain road with other people with ice cream cones, blocking vehicles.
Before the verdict, the prosecution revised the first charge into the crime of possession of "offensive weapons or tools suitable for illegal use." The defendant was convicted of two crimes earlier.
The case of a college student hiding a hexagonal spoon refers to the case of "Going to Tangduhuo" and was rejected and sentenced
The defendant accused the defendant of being involved in carrying a hexagonal key and questioned the police's false confession after being arrested.
Fugitive Offenders Ordinance | Stage designer involved in Tibet and Spana’s defense alleges that the police ignore it for work purposes
The defense expects the magistrate to impose a non-custodial sentence or suspended sentence
The court obtained reports from the rehabilitation center, reeducation center, and training center for the defendant. The report stated that his physical fitness was not suitable for entering the reeducation center.
The defense pleaded that the defendant had been waiting for two weeks. No violence or use of the hexagonal key was used in the case, and no one was frightened by blocking the road. He hoped that the court would impose a non-custodial sentence or suspended sentence.
The magistrate stated that the crime of causing obstruction in a public place is lighter than the crime of possessing an offensive weapon, and the maximum penalty is a fine of 5,000 yuan or three months' imprisonment.
If sentenced to imprisonment for this crime, the defendant must be sentenced to at least 3 months in prison; given that the defendant is young and has been around for a while, the magistrate considers whether such a sentence will be unreasonable, but the fine seems to be too light.
Defendant Chen Dongcheng Jin was sentenced to a rehabilitation center at the West Kowloon Court.
The magistrate said that social peace is more important than the defendant’s rehabilitation
After hearing the defense's submissions, the magistrate adjourned the court for a while, and finally decided to sentence the two crimes to a rehabilitation center and execute them at the same time.
He said that, in addition to considering the rehabilitation of the defendant, the sentence must also protect public safety, maintain social peace and act as a deterrent. Therefore, imprisonment punishment is the only option.
Since the prison term of the training center ranged from 12 to 18 months, the crime of possession of offensive weapons was too serious, and the defendant was sentenced to a rehabilitation center.
As for the other charge, the magistrate stated that the law does not prohibit the sentence of penal institutions, reiterating that social security is more important than the defendant’s rehabilitation.
He said that after considering the circumstances of the case, he considered it unsuitable to impose a probation order or fine, and that the rehabilitation center was not a disproportionate penalty.
Case Number: WKCC1162/2020
Hearings related to the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance