In May 2020, the Legislative Council resumed deliberation on the second reading of the National Anthem Law, and some people initiated the "three strikes" action.
In that month, the police stopped and searched an architect in the ground floor lobby of a hotel in Causeway Bay, and found gasoline and 40 throat studs in his backpack and reusable bag. Later, they also seized a number of glass windows in a hotel room. bottle.
Architectural designer denied two counts of possession of items with intent to damage property. The judge today (24th) convicted the charges involving items in the backpack, and pointed out that the throat studs were obviously uniquely made and obviously offensive, but The other crime is not convicted.
The judge first ordered background reports for the defendants and adjourned the sentencing until April 14.
The accused who was originally released on bail shall be remanded immediately.
Defendant Liang Hantao, 29, reported as a designer.
He was charged with two counts of possession with intent to damage property.
The first charge alleges that on May 28, 2020, at the ground floor lobby of Fung Ming Building, Lee Garden Hill Road, Causeway Bay, he possessed 40 iron nails with rubber hoses, a plastic bottle containing 1,138 milliliters of gasoline, a plastic bottle containing 750ml glass bottle containing gasoline, one metal bottle containing 415ml gasoline; as well as a pair of long nose pliers and a black spray paint.
Female relatives cry after the ruling
The second charge alleges that the defendant possessed 13 unopened glass bottles containing vodka and one 275ml empty glass bottle in a hotel room on the same day.
The defendant was found guilty of the first charge and acquitted of the other charge.
Several onlookers told the defendant after the verdict: "Take care" and "hold on", and some female relatives and friends cried bitterly.
As for the defendant's claim that he discarded the items in the bag for his friend to prevent his friend from using it, the judge said in his ruling that his argument was untenable.
The judge questioned that the defendant claimed that he suspected that there were demonstration items or even illegal items in the bag, but he was willing to take the risk of breaking the law and take it.
In addition, the friend and the defendant are not relatives, but are only friends of his girlfriend's younger brother, and the defendant is willing to take risks for the other party.
Police in Causeway Bay detain 2 men for flammable materials, rubber throat nails, hotel room inspection, alcohol and gas mask designer involved in iron nails and rubber hose case trial will begin next year
The defendant stated that the throat nails had no practical purpose other than to cause damage
The judge continued to point out that, from the weight of the items in the backpack, the different types of items, etc., he believed that the defendant must know and possess the items in the backpack and take them out of the hotel.
The judge also considered that on May 24 and May 27 of the same year, the police had received reports of anti-national security laws and anti-national anthem laws in Causeway Bay and Wan Chai. There were 42 related cases, including arson and illegal assembly.
In addition, the gasoline involved in the case weighed more than 2.3 liters and was carried in bottles.
There are also 40 uniquely made throat nails in the backpack, which are obviously aggressive.
The judge said there was no practical use for it other than to cause damage.
The judge ruled that the only inference in the case was that the defendant intended to use the contents of the bag to destroy or damage other people's property or belongings, and the judge found the defendant guilty of the first charge.
For the second charge, the judge stated that the room in question was not rented in the defendant's name, and the room appeared to have been used by other persons.
In addition, DNA testing revealed that the glass bottle had DNA from other people.
The judge continued, even if the glass bottles were in the possession of the defendant and others, it was difficult to make irresistible inferences just by possessing these glass bottles. The glass bottles must be used to damage other people's property.
The judge therefore ruled that the defendant was not guilty.
Case number: DCCC 37/2021