Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (151683)	11/18/2019 10:24:56 AM
From: Snowshoe	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 218249

re "He would have a hard time explaining why he did not disburse away when ordered by the police to do so" The intent of illegal assembly laws is to prevent people from congregating in groups where trouble may occur. In my country the size of the group varies from one jurisdiction to another, and could be 2 or more, 3 or more, 5 or more, etc. I presume that HK law is similar. So... the banker was in a group that was ordered to disperse. Everyone else left, but he stayed. Thus he ended up alone, so how can he be charged with illegal assembly? I'm not a lawyer, but this seems to me like a strong reason to toss out that charge! ;)