反修例引發的暴動案第一宗認罪的今天判監4年, 我剛看了胡雅文法官(Amanda Woodcock)的判刑理由書(Reasons for Sentence: HKSAR and Sin Ka Ho), 判刑比我預期稍高一點。胡官認為本案的性質比梁天琦案更嚴重, 胡官也同時考慮了上訴庭聽審過另外幾宗暴動/縱火案的刑期上訴, 最終判冼嘉豪4年監, 以6年為起點, 認罪減3份1刑期。冼嘉豪自己寫了求情信, 原文我不知怎寫, 胡官在判詞這樣描述(胡官是懂看中文的):

38. In his own mitigation letter the defendant writes that he understands that violence is never the way to express one’s opinion. The rule of law is not to be undermined and all matters should be resolved by more appropriate means. He is sorry to have disappointed his parents, brother and his girlfriend. He acknowledges that he, I quote “broke the peace of Hong Kong. I set a bad example for those young people yearning for change. If I had the opportunity to talk to them myself, I would urge them not resort to violence”. He takes full responsibility for his actions and mistake. He hopes to be able to contribute to his own family and Hong Kong society after serving his sentence. 

冼嘉豪當真會對「兄弟」講這番「大逆不道」反革命的話嗎?  這都無需考究的, mitigation就好像競選的campaign language/promise, 都是充滿謊言的。胡官對於求情理由及一堆求情信, 都不予考慮, 就只是給予3份1的認罪折扣, 因為胡官認為要判具阻嚇作用的刑期:  

44. In this case, a deterrent sentence will reflect the fact that the defendant joined in an attempt to overpower police performing protective duties. Deterrence overrides the sentencing principle of rehabilitation in the prevailing circumstances including the increasing incidents of unrest and a rising number of large-scale public protests involving violence. This is clear from the Court of Final appeal in SJ v Wong Chi Fung 2018 21 HKCFAR 35.
......
61. I also take the view that a repeated attack on the police in the due execution of their duties, their duty to protect the Legislative Council, which led to a riot at the doors of the Legislature of Hong Kong was a direct attack on the rule of law which undoubtedly caused harm. Such criminal conduct showed no respect for law and order nor the safety of law enforcement officers. 

當然本案的判刑是沒有指導作用的, 別的暴動案可以判不同的刑期, 主要考慮的元素上訴庭在梁天琦案已列了出來。我只希望疫情放緩後的遊行集會示威活動的參加者, 以此為戒, 一時衝動後患無窮, 革命不成功, 身陷囹圄中。這類判刑, 陸續有來, 與一些人的落差大, 純因為這些人不諳刑法, 總是一廂情願, 只看到自己想看的天空。 

今天監警會發表反修例示威的審視報告, 肯定有很多人不滿定論, 我對報告有關7.21元朗事件的看法也頗有意見。另外, 報告指12宗警察開槍事件都沒違規, 我都不知有12宗那麼多, 看來也應包括我在上兩篇所講的一宗了。若如此, 監警審視過也覺得無問題, 想成功作私人檢控下去就無望了。至少, 落到律政司手上就一定撤回檢控。 

革命尚未成功, 兄弟仍須努力, 努力讀書, 知識才是力量, 坐班房最多只能鍛練體力, 要這樣就不如放工去做gym好過。