The Court of Appeal rejected the appeals of seven defendants, including actor Gregory Wong Chung-yiu, who appealed their convictions and sentences over the storming of the Legislative Council complex in 2019.
The seven — Gregory Wong, Lo Lok-sang, Amy Pat Wai-fan, Althea Suen, Shum Keng-lok, Ng Chi-yung and Lam Kam-kwan — appealed the sentences last December, while Pat and Wong also appealed against their convictions.
Wong argued that his purpose in entering the Legislative Council chamber was merely to provide charging equipment for reporters. However, the trial judge believed this was merely a pretext to justify his presence in the complex.
The Court of Appeal stated that the trial judge presented detailed reasons, reasonably and sufficiently supporting his conclusion.
It also noted that, despite knowing the Legislative Council complex was occupied, Wong still entered the chamber wearing a black T-shirt bearing the words "1/2,000,001 I'm free, therefore I am" and Wong not only handed equipment to reporters but also engaged in physical interaction with protesters, including patting them on the shoulder.
The Court of Appeal also stated that, given the nature of rioting, the court would not and should not treat the actions of individual rioters as isolated incidents when sentencing. Taking into full account the seriousness of the riot, the Court of Appeal considered a 6.5 to 7-year sentence to be an appropriate starting point, not excessive.
Upon consideration, the Court of Appeal concluded that Wong indeed intended to participate in the riot and to encourage prohibited behavior, thus dismissing his appeals regarding conviction and sentence.
Another appellant, Pat, argued that she was a mental patient with the mental capacity of a 17 to 18-year-old, and that she was not fully aware of her actions at the time of the incident, only knowing that her actions were illegal.
She admitted to participating in the riot spontaneously and alone, but strongly argued that she did not actively participate in the riot.
The Court of Appeal considered that she was carrying an iron rod and that the trial judge's conviction was reasonable.
Furthermore, as the trial judge had taken her mental illness into account when sentencing, the Court of Appeal considered the starting point of sentencing appropriate and not obviously excessive.
The Court of Appeal also dismissed the appeals regarding the sentence of the other appellants.
The trial Judge ruled that Suen and Shum were relatively minor, limited to appearing to encourage and support others, and sentenced them to 57 months, and 55 months and 15 days in prison, respectively. Lo and Pat's involvement was moderate, and they were both sentenced to 59 months and 7 days in prison.
Wong's involvement was the lowest level, but he did encourage other participants, who were sentenced to 74 months in prison.
Ng's involvement was higher, insisting on staying until the last minute, and he was sentenced to 80 months in prison. Lam participated in the riot outside the Legislative Council, using metal barricades to damage the glass of the Legislative Council's main gate, which triggered the subsequent occupation of the Legislative Council. His involvement was the most serious, and he was sentenced to 82 months in prison.
