新西蘭基督城回教寺屠殺事件的被告已被控一項謀殺罪而收押, 死的人數已達50, 被告下次提堂必定加控更多謀殺罪, 暫時只控以一項holding charge, 是為了快捷把案件帶入司法程序, 先確定一名死者身分來提控。本篇不是評論這大屠殺, 而是談論極右立場的澳洲參議員Fraser Anning被17歲少年當頭拍蛋一事。傳媒把少年稱為「蛋童」(egg boy), 發起眾籌為他打官司(萬一被控), 否則資助他用來買蛋, 現已籌款超過1萬澳幣。如果大家有看新聞, 都可以看到蛋童一面用手機拍攝, 一面把一隻蛋拍在Anning的頭上, 即時被Anning揪了兩拳, 繼而被幾個Anning集會支持者摔倒制服箍頸按在地上, 後來警察把蛋童帶走候查。想看這件事的報導可按此連結: Egg boy speaks after egging Senator Fraser Anning for lashing out at Muslims
從影片可見, 蛋童、Anning及制服蛋童那幾個人, 都可以被控襲撃罪, Anning當時很明顯是反擊, 所用的是過份武力, 而制服蛋童的人也明顯使用不合比例的武力, 他們都可以被檢控。蛋童只有17歲, 可以無需檢控, 給他口頭警告就足夠。其他一干人等, 尤其那幾個貌似流氓的人, 理應被控。襲擊罪在維多利亞省訂立於Summary Offences Act, 一經定罪可處罰15個罰款單位(In Victoria 1 penalty unit = $161.19. In New South Wales 1 penalty unit =$110)或判監3個月。如果此事發生在香港, 那些人就不能使用市民拘捕權(俗稱101拘捕令, 我以前也寫過一篇: 101拘捕令在法律上的意思), 原因是香港的普通襲撃罪最高只可判監1年, 而可行使101拘捕令的罪行是要可判監超過1年的罪行, 所以不適用於普通襲撃罪。
Anning之所以能當上參議員本身是個笑話, 他在選舉中只獲19票, 他當時所屬政黨One Nation在2016年昆士蘭選舉得票兩萬多而獲得兩個議席, 黨魁Pauline Hanson已獲超過兩萬票, 黨中得票第二多的Malcolm Roberts也只有77票, Anning以19票排第三位。Roberts後來被揭發違反國籍要求而被褫奪參議院席位, Anning因此補上。他補上參議員翌日就脫黨, 幾經週折現在是無人要的獨立議員, 有時真的是命水, accidentally就入了參議院, 做其低端議員, 也吸引到低端支持者。也難怪蛋童叫這些人為bogan。就算沒有蛋童事件, Anning這議員身分很快就會完結了, 因為大選在即。民主選舉無疑有很多缺失, 但缺失之餘也有制衡的保障。
今早聽收音機，訪問這位低端議員，他的回應更加證實此人冇料到，非常低智慧。悉尼晨鋒報報道，已經有過一百萬人簽名要踢這蠢才出國會了。
回覆刪除僥倖入局, 醜態畢露。
刪除特朗普是否也是標少所言僥倖入局, 醜態畢露之流？
刪除也很多相類之處, 都是極右白人至上的人, 但他比Anning高明得多, 但Anning起碼明刀明槍, 特朗普卻虛假下賤。
刪除標少, 香港現在也興起這股歪風, 香港出什麼事都是那每天150的錯
刪除撞地鐵都可以怪新移民太多
抱歉，不見得他多高明
回覆刪除看你怎介定「高明」。
刪除https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/1939892/high-court-selfie-lands-hong-kong-lawyer-hot-water
回覆刪除I suppose Hong Kong Solicitor Junius Ho (the idiot who took photos in Court and uploaded to his own Facebook) is also a "低端議員"?
A police investigation has been launched against the former president of the Hong Kong Law Society after he uploaded a picture of himself inside the court building, a move that could be in breach of the law.
The selfie of Junius Ho Kwan-yiu, apparently taken outside Court No.28 of the High Court, was widely circulated on social media on Thursday after the pro-Beijing solicitor uploaded it to Facebook.
The caption on the picture read: “Inside Court No.28 … hang in there Uncle Pui!”
Section 7 of the Summary Offences Ordinance states that anyone who takes or attempts to take any picture in any court shall be liable to a fine of HK$250. It further states that a photograph would be deemed to be taken in court if it is taken in the building which the court is held.
Let's forget about Mr Ho.
刪除The maximum fine should be level 1, ie $2000
Hong Kong Solicitor Junius Ho is a disgusting criminal.
刪除https://news.rthk.hk/rthk/en/component/k2/1354628-20170918.htm
Senior counsel Ronny Tong led the criticisms against legislator and solicitor Junius Ho over his apparent call to kill anyone who attempts to separate Hong Kong from the mainland.
Tong, an executive councillor and a barrister, said Ho may have committed a crime with his call while 22 pan-democratic lawmakers in a joint statement asked the police to take action against the pro-Beijing legislator.
Speaking to reporters during a mass rally demanding the University of Hong Kong sack Occupy Movement leader Benny Tai on Sunday, Ho asked "if [independence-seekers] are not killed, what else are we to do?"
Asked if this amounts to criminal intimidation, Ho responded by saying that it’s “not a crime to slaughter pigs or dogs”, and warned the journalists not to take his comments out of context.
He further explained that “people who act to promote independence subvert the fate of the entire country, and force all Hongkongers and the 1.3-billion people of China to pay a huge cost.”
Earlier, addressing thousands of protesters on stage, Yuen Long district councillor Tsang Shu-wo repeatedly asked the crowd "if people [claim to be] not Chinese and seek Hong Kong independence; aren't they outsiders who should be killed?"
Ho then responded by saying, “no mercy”.
On Monday, Tong said Ho may have violated two clauses of the public order ordinance.
Tong told a radio programme that sections 26 and 17(b) of that law prohibit proposing violence at public gatherings, and using abusive or insulting words in public with intent to provoke a breach of the peace.
Tong said even if Ho had been speaking figuratively – that independence advocates should be removed from their positions in society rather than outright death – the comments may still be criminal.
He called on Ho, who's a solicitor, to watch his conduct. Tong also appealed to everyone to stop encouraging violence and insults, saying that's not acceptable in any civilised society.
Legal scholar Tai, who was the target of Sunday's rally also urged the police to take action against Ho's words.
The Secretary for Justice, Rimsky Yuen said on Monday whether Ho's remarks were criminal depends on the overall meaning and background of the comments. Yuen said people can't just focus on one or two words.
If anyone thinks that more needs to be done about the matter, the Secretary said they could file reports through the established procedures.
https://hk.news.appledaily.com/local/realtime/article/20170922/57240879
刪除何君堯被揭非英執業律師 卻一直涉虛報
立法會議員何君堯繼早前「殺無赦」言論後，又因其執業律師資格引起爭議。網上流傳一封英國律師監管局（SRA）質疑何律師資格的信件，何君堯解畫時卻自爆自己沒在英國執業，講法與他在律師樓、立法會及選舉宣傳的履歷中自稱當地「執業律師」不符。有法律界人士指，虛報執業資格在英國屬刑事罪行，律師會亦可就其操守展開調查；建制派議員謝偉俊亦促何交代自己有否執業資格。
「101拘捕令在法律上的意思」文中連結到另一文「過分武力Excessive Force」有問題。
回覆刪除Terry
Thank you. Fixed.
刪除Bill少，想問下，馬路上面玩遙控車係咪合法？
回覆刪除玩果個應該唔符合 Cap 374， driver (司機、駕駛人) 既定義？
可被檢控Summary Offences Ordinance。
刪除不符司機/駕駛人的定義。
哈哈~ 如果是1:1, 實際上真係司機/駕駛人, 只不過係科技新現象
刪除係咪用 “在公眾地方造成阻礙” ？
刪除任何人無合法權限或解釋而陳列或留下，或導致陳列或留下任何物品或東西，而這些物品或東西對在公眾地方的人或車輛造成阻礙、不便或危害者，或可能對在公眾地方的人或車輛造成阻礙、不便或危害者，可處罰款$5,000或監禁3個月。
Common Law public nuisance or S.4(23) or S.4A Cap 228
刪除