Social News
Written by: Zhu Dixin
2021-03-17 15:10
Last update date: 2021-03-17 15:10
A member of the public held a "Sanxia Sanctions" rally in Central in January last year. A 60-year-old Hanshe attacked an officer of the Speed Dragon Squad near the rally.
He was convicted of assaulting the police and sentenced to 1 month in prison.
He appealed both the conviction and sentence, and today (17th) in the High Court, he submitted a live film as new evidence, saying that the film showed that the situation at the time was inconsistent with the police officer's statement.
However, the prosecution opposed the admission of these films as new evidence, and claimed that the films were consistent with the allegations.
After hearing the submissions, the judge adjourned the ruling until April 15, during which time Han was allowed to continue his bail.
The appellant Shi Zhenying was previously ruled to attack Police Constable A who was performing his duties at the junction of Chater Road and Club Street in Central on January 19, 2020.
The appellant submitted the film card but failed to punch
The lawyer representing the appellant stated today that the content of the film involved is different from the statement made by the police officer.
Regarding the prosecution's accusation that the appellant pushed the police officer on the chest and punched the police officer, the lawyer pointed out that the appellant was shot in the film waving his hand and pushed the police officer away, but he did not throw a punch.
Regarding the trial magistrate's belief that police officer A and another police officer were honest and reliable, and told the facts, the appellant's lawyer said that after viewing the footage, the statement that the police officer was honest and reliable was untenable.
The lawyer also pointed out that these films were not available at the original trial and hope the judge will accept them as new evidence.
Police and civilian clashes occurred after a rally in Central on January 19, 2020. (See the picture below for details)
+3
+3
+3
The official said that the dragon sunburned that day
Regarding the sentence appeal, the appellant’s lawyer said that the trial magistrate had not considered it and that the appellant was beaten to the head in the case.
The lawyer also stated that the assembly involved in the case was originally issued a notice of no objection.
However, the judge pointed out that the police later demanded to be disbanded, and pointed out that the garden road was full of people on the same day.
The prosecution believes that the angle of the film does not affect the punch
In response, the prosecution representative objected to listing the film involved in the case as new evidence, saying that the appellant had known the source of the film involved in the original trial, but did not seek other information from the source.
The prosecution also stated that the content of the film was consistent with the allegations, and that the appellant was photographed pushing the police officer away.
As for punching, the film could not be shot due to angle problems.
The prosecution continued that there was a large-scale demonstration on the day of the case, and the appellant walked out of the road to prevent the police from dispersing, questioned whether the case was minor and believed that the sentence was not unreasonable.
The judge adjourned the ruling.
Case number: HCMA250/2020
Warehouse clerk was stopped by police officers for uncooperative and resisted arrest and convicted for 4 weeks
Hong Kong University student convicted of obstructing road and failed appeal and must be immediately imprisoned for 2 months
Social worker Liu Jiadong prevented the police from dispersing the sentence and appealed and reduced his sentence from 1 year to 8 months in prison.
01News
Court of Appeals for the Assault on Fugitive Offenders Ordinance