China News Service, Hong Kong, January 11 (Reporter Wang Jiacheng) A 28-year-old male packaging worker in a sheltered factory in Hong Kong was accused of shining the eyes of the sheriff and police officer with a laser pointer at the airport the year before.
The case was retrial in Sha Tin Magistracy on the 11th. Ou Defu was convicted of one count of possession of an offensive weapon in a public place and one count of assault on a police officer.
Taking into account the defendant’s mental problems, the magistrate adjourned the case to the 25th of this month for sentence, pending a request for mental, psychological, and background reports for the defendant, during which the defendant must be remanded.
The defendant Ou Defu was charged on August 13 last year for irradiating the eyes of a sergeant and a police officer with a laser pointer outside the departure hall of the Airport Terminal 1 and was charged with two counts of assault and A crime of possession of offensive weapons in a public place.
The police chief confessed that many people gathered at the airport on the day of the incident, so he went to the airport on duty.
At 11:20 in the evening, the sergeant saw the defendant in a black shirt sweep his eyes with a laser pointer. The sergeant first avoided the green light, and then the defendant shot him with the laser pointer several times, causing his eyes to sting. And swelling.
The police chief issued a warning to the defendant. The two were 5 to 6 meters apart at the time, and then other police officers stepped forward to subdue him.
The magistrate believed that the sheriff’s evidence was honest and reliable, and accepted that he was indeed shot by the laser pointer from the defendant’s area.
The defendant argued that because other demonstrators used laser pointers, he brought the laser pointer to the scene.
The magistrate believed that the district had arrived at the scene at 9:30 a.m. that day, and it was impossible to know that the demonstrators would use laser pointers, and questioned why laser pointers were used for lighting during the day.
The magistrate stated that there were many unreasonable places in the defendant’s confession. He believed that the only reason for the defendant’s possession of the laser pointer was to injure the police, and finally ruled on one crime of possession of offensive weapons in a public place and one assault. Police convicted.
As for the other crime of assaulting a police officer, although a police officer claimed to have been irradiated with a laser pointer, he failed to indicate the source of the beam and the clothes of the person who irradiated it, and admitted that more than one color and beam were directed at him , There is no evidence of exposure to the district, and the verdict is not guilty.
(Finish)