Advertisement
Advertisement
Mong Kok riot
Get more with myNEWS
A personalised news feed of stories that matter to you
Learn more
The unrest three years ago was sparked by a row between officers from the hawker control team and street vendors on Argyle Street during Lunar New Year. Photo: AP

Hong Kong man who threw brick at police ‘for fun’ during Mong Kok riot granted permission to appeal after judge agrees he did not act as badly as another who tried to torch taxi

  • Judge says Tang Ho-ying, 26, and his lawyer raised a reasonable argument
  • Tang was jailed for two years and 10 months last April
A Hong Kong man jailed for hurling a brick at police “for fun” during the 2016 Mong Kok riot was granted the chance to appeal against his sentence on Tuesday, after a court found he had not acted as badly as a rioter who tried to torch a taxi.

Mr Justice Andrew Macrae, acting chief judge of the High Court, gave Tang Ho-ying permission to lodge the appeal after hearing a comparison his lawyer made between the 26-year-old and another convicted rioter.

Tang, a waiter, pleaded guilty to one count of rioting in March last year over the unrest that gripped the popular shopping district in the early hours of February 9, 2016.

Last April he was jailed for two years and 10 months for throwing a brick during the riot, which Tang told police after his arrest he did for fun.

Trouble spilled over to various parts of Mong Kok with bricks and bottles thrown at police. Photo: Edward Wong

Tang’s jail term was reduced from a starting point of five years after the sentencing judge took into account his guilty plea and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

On Tuesday, Tang’s counsel Douglas Kwok King-hin compared his client’s same starting sentence to that of Yeung Ka-lun, a technician who was jailed in 2017 over the riot. Yeung was sentenced to four years and nine months in jail after the court factored in his mitigation.

Former separatist leader not guilty of additional Mong Kok riot charge

Kwok argued that while Yeung tried to set a taxi on fire, his client had thrown one brick.

So, the barrister said, it would be wrong to put his client’s criminality on a par with Yeung’s, and the flawed comparison had caused Tang to serve an excessive jail term.

Macrae agreed, noting that not only had Yeung tried to burn a taxi – which could have caused further chaos had it exploded – he was also part of a group that hurled flaming objects that landed in shops.

“It seems to me that [Yeung] stood in a worse position than the appellant in this case,” Macrae said, concluding that Tang and his lawyer had raised a reasonable argument.

Prosecutors countered that the sentencing judge had already given Tang concessions by factoring in his mental condition but Macrae said it would be a matter for the appeal to discuss.

Autistic men who threw bottles at police during riot ask to be spared jail

Following the judge’s ruling, Kwok asked for the appeal to be heard as soon as possible as Tang would finish his jail sentence by February next year.

Since the riot, 25 people, aged 17 to 73, have been convicted on various charges with sentences ranging from detention centre to jail terms of between 21 days and seven years.

The night of unrest three years ago was sparked by a row between officers from the hawker control team and street vendors on Argyle Street during Lunar New Year.

The altercation escalated into a riot that spilled over to various parts of Mong Kok, where protesters hurled bricks and glass bottles at police as fires burned on the streets.

Post