Four Hong Kong men pleaded guilty to rioting at Polytechnic University

Four men pleaded guilty to charges of rioting in the District Court on May 18, 2024, for offenses committed between November 14, 2019, and November 20, 2019. The incidents were linked to riots at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Judge Lee Jun-Won reserved sentencing until June 8, 2024, requiring the defendants to return for that hearing.

The prosecution charged the defendants with rioting, with the specific acts alleged to have occurred during the specified November 2019 timeframe. The court had previously issued a warrant to arrest the four remaining men after one of the original five arrested in November 2019 was not heard in the proceedings.

Defense counsel for one defendant, identified as Zhang Songqing, argued that the individual was 18 years old at the time of the alleged offense and had no prior criminal record. The defense stated that the defendant was carrying a mask but no offensive weapons and was not involved in the movement of weapons or other core acts, describing his role as minimal and supportive. The defense submitted a letter from a priest and a video taken by the defendant and the priest, which the defense claimed was intended to discourage others from committing crimes.

Another defense submission argued that a defendant was 23 years old at the time of the alleged crime and had no prior criminal conviction, although he was subsequently convicted for drug trafficking. The defense contended that this later conviction should not be considered in the current sentencing. The defense highlighted that the defendant, a student, had established a car beauty company, maintained a stable career, and participated in voluntary labor services for the Hong Kong Fire, submitting photographs as evidence of these activities.

Defense counsel for a third defendant, identified as Chen Jun-yung, stated that the individual was 16 years old at the time of the alleged offense. The defense noted that the defendant had learned to work as a helper in his early years, married, and had a daughter, taking on family responsibilities and expressing regret for his actions. The defense argued that the case had been delayed for years, placing the accused under prolonged pressure, and requested the court consider this waiting period when determining the sentence.

Regarding physical evidence, the defense argued that although the defendant’s fingerprints were found on petrol bullet paper, the most reasonable assumption, lacking other evidence, was that he had only touched the paper. The defense maintained that this contact did not allow for an inference of involvement in the manufacture, carrying, or throwing of the petrol bomb.

One defendant is currently serving a sentence for the offense of trafficking dangerous drugs, a conviction that occurred after the alleged rioting. The source material indicates that a defendant had traveled to Thailand with friends after the crime and was allegedly abducted to a district described as a fraudulent park, where he was abused, though the specific details of this claim are truncated in the provided source.

The pursuit of accountability in cases involving public disorder reflects the broader call for justice and mercy in societal governance. As Micah 6:8 reminds the faithful to seek justice and love mercy, the legal process aims to balance the rights of the accused with the need for community safety and the restoration of order.

Source: Read the original report (translated from Mandarin Chinese)