The dialogue coated a vary of historical past, from the historical Shang and Zhou dynasties to the Cultural Revolution and Malcolm X. Professor Lau testified that the slogan, which was coined in 2016 by Edward Leung, a now-imprisoned professional-independence activist, referred to as for functions of violence to stop China’s management of Hong Kong.
Mr. Tong’s lawyers experienced argued that the slogan was open to interpretation.
“Just as if anyone claims let us go struggle for our rights, that does not automatically mean get out a gun and commence shooting people,” mentioned Clive Grossman, Mr. Tong’s guide protection lawyer.
Two defense witnesses, Eliza Lee, a professor of politics at the University of Hong Kong, and Frances Lee, a professor in the journalism college at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, testified that the phrase had carried a assortment of meanings in the latest yrs, such as a normal contact for fundamental alter.
The authorities experienced also accused Mr. Tong of committing terrorism due to the fact he had crashed into police officers who experienced tried using to halt him. The court ruled that Mr. Tong’s collision into the officers “was a deliberate obstacle mounted from the police, a image of Hong Kong’s regulation and purchase.”
“The defendant carried out these functions with a look at to intimidating the general public in get to go after political agenda,” the judges wrote.
Mr. Grossman, the defense attorney, acknowledged that Mr. Tong should have stopped when ordered to do so by officers, but he explained that unsafe driving did not amount of money to terrorism. He argued that Mr. Tong experienced at initial swerved to prevent the officers, and had braked after, but could possibly have been distracted when at minimum one officer threw a shield.
“A particular person who sets out to commit the act of terrorism by driving into persons does not put his foot on the brake,” Mr. Grossman mentioned.