10 convicted of rioting near PolyU during 2019 Hong Kong demos, as judges point to protester clothing, gear

Ten people were convicted for rioting by two Hong Kong courts on Wednesday over a protest in Yau Ma Tei during the 2019 extradition bill protests.

Chan Yin-wang, Teresa Cheung, Chu Kwok-chi, Dao Manh-hieu, Xavier Ko, and Lam Fung-chi appeared in front of Judge Adriana Tse, while Leung Siu-ming, Tse Kin-lok, Wong Ka-wing, and Cheung Chong-fat appeared in front of Deputy District Judge Amy Chan.

November 18 Dylan Hollingsworth yau ma tei — File Photo: Dylan Hollingsworth/HKFP.

They were found guilty of taking part in a riot on November 18, 2019 in Yau Ma Tei on a stretch of Nathan Road between Waterloo Road and Hamilton Street.

Leung was also convicted of possession of offensive weapon in public place.

The incident took place as protesters occupied Hong Kong Polytechnic University in nearby Hung Hom during a days-long siege. It saw almost 1,400 people arrested on campus and in neighbouring districts.

Protests erupted in June 2019 over a since-axed extradition bill. They escalated into sometimes violent displays of dissent against police behaviour, amid calls for democracy and anger over Beijing’s encroachment. Demonstrators demanded an independent probe into police conduct, amnesty for those arrested and a halt to the characterisation of protests as “riots.”

Not ‘innocent bystanders’

Judge Chan refused to accept the testimony of the four defendants before her. Chan ruled that it was not a coincidence that the defendants appeared at the scene of the protest.

The judge also refused to accept that the defendants were “innocent bystanders.”

She also cited the colour of the defendants’ clothes. She ruled that Leung, who was wearing a black mask, used his outfit and gear to signify that he was a “comrade” of the protesters.

CHAN Wai-mun 陳慧敏.JPG — Amy Chan. Photo: Judiciary.

The judge also noted that Cheung Chong-fat was not wearing a black outfit, but said that clothing was only one of the indicators in deciding whether a person was a protester.

“…[P]rotesters would not always wear black, and wearing black does not mean that one is a protester – I will not label someone simply because of the colour of their clothes, their outfits is only one of the pointers,” Chan’s written ruling in Chinese read.

‘Only irresistible inference’

In a separate court hearing on Wednesday, District Court Judge Tse cited the dark clothing of the six defendants, and said that it was a “mark” that matched that of the protesters.

Tse said that the only “irresistible inference” was that the six wore dark clothes and gear to intentionally spur on and take part in the riot, the Witness reported.

The judge also rejected the defendants’ testimony and refused to accept that they were innocent bystanders, InMedia reported.

District Court Judge Adriana Tse. Photo: Judiciary.

Tse said that it was not a coincidence that they were at the scene, as there was a riot on Nathan Road, and those not intending to take part in it would leave quickly, regardless of how ignorant or indifferent they were towards the situation.

The defendants will submit their mitigation statements and face sentencing in September.

Help safeguard press freedom & keep HKFP free for all readers by supporting our team