Social News
Written by: Li Huina
2021-01-05 18:48
Last update date: 2021-01-05 18:51
The middle-aged man encountered an anti-regulation activity in Mong Kok in November last year. After being suspected of being hit by a tear gas bomb, he was "excited" and committed disorderly conduct in public places. He was sentenced to a social service order for 200 hours, but the appeal was straightforward. The charge was dropped.
High Court Judge Huang Chenghou today (5th) gave an explanation. Although the trial magistrate believed that the middle-aged man claimed that he supported the police on the one hand and insulted the police on the other hand, his statement was contradictory; however, the judge believed that those who had always supported the police enforcement were out of control. Speaking insulting police officers is not necessarily contradictory.
The appellant, Wang Weiwei, was previously ruled that on November 10, 2019, there was constant noise in the public areas of Nathan Road and Argyle Street, Mong Kok, with the intention of inciting others to destroy the social peace.
Claiming that the tear gas bomb exploded on the way home
According to the prosecution plan, when the police warned the gathering to disperse that day, Wang yelled loudly: "X, your mother, a gangster, I won't have two tear gas canisters." Wang was arrested when he left.
When he defended himself in the original trial, he was hit by two tear gas canisters when he returned home and was angry. He did not shoot the police. Instead, the police raised a gun at him and irradiated it with strong light. He claimed that he supported the police to enforce the law.
Speaking of insults when you are out of control
The trial magistrate accused Wang that on the one hand he supported the police to enforce the law, but on the other hand he insulted the police. Their statements were contradictory. When Wang appealed, he refuted the magistrate’s statement and believed that the two might not necessarily be in conflict.
Judge Huang Chenghou believes that the magistrate's observation is not unreasonable, but a person who has always supported the police's enforcement of the law does not necessarily contradict each other when he is emotionally out of control and speaks insulting police officers.
The trial judge believed that Wang Xin was a female
Regarding his claim that he was pointed at him by the police and exposed to strong light, the magistrate believed that he was slanderous and questioned why the defense did not point out the matter to the police officer.
When Wang appealed, he emphasized that he had mentioned the circumstances to the lawyer, and the magistrate could not believe his statement because the defense did not point out the circumstances to the police officer.
Judging Wang's integrity with inaccurate facts
Huang Guan said that the magistrate did not know that Wang You had given the lawyer relevant instructions, and did not believe Wang's statement on the grounds that the defense did not cross-examine. She believed that her judgment on the appellant’s integrity was based on inaccurate facts and was uneasy about the conviction. The king's appeal was straightforward.
Case number: HCMA145/2020
The middle-aged Hanzhong tear gas bomb exploded and was convicted of disturbing the order and the original sentence was overturned on appeal
The middle-aged Han Lianzhong exploded and scolded the police officer for impulse and non-premeditated social service after a tear gas bomb
The tear gas bomb in China is accused of disrupting order, and the defendant claims that he has always supported the police force.
The middle-aged man was hit by a tear gas bomb and exploded with a rude official who ordered social peace to be disrupted and convicted of disturbing order
01News
Court of Appeals for Hearing of Fugitive Offenders Ordinance