It seems to me that the Chinese government is not managed well. Yes, the Shenzhen researcher should have been stopped, but I see no reason to put him in prison.
He went to prison for embarrassing the Chinese government. If this happened in America or EU, then they would go to prison for performing unethical experiments on humans. In modern times, for good or for bad there is a large process before we try something on humans. As the past has shown that there have been a lot of death, and often unjust selection on who to experiment on. And many are suffering from the consequences after the fact.
Hold up... are you actually under the impression that you need to PAY for a trial by jury in the US? And that people are required to sit in jail for YEARS waiting on trial based upon financial resources??
That's an impressive level of stupidity.
The sixth amendment to the constitution guarantees a citizen's right to a trial by jury regardless of personal finances and also provides a right to a "speedy" trial... which is further protected from delay by the speedy trial act of 1974.
You don't need to Pay for a jury trial... However if you want a layer who just wasn't picked out of a pool of available lawyers being paid a "charity rate" to cover you for any prolonged legal action, you are going to need to pay a lot more. If you get the court provided lawyer his interest is to get this job over with as quickly as possible so they can work on something more profitable. So they will probably just try to settle out of court, or get you to plead guilty and take a lighter punishment.
Obviously if you have a lot of money then you can afford to pay for a higher level of service but it's absolutely false that a public defender's best interest is to get your case over with as quickly as possible to "work on something more profitable". A public defender works for the public defender's office and there is no profitable vs unprofitable case for them, they're getting paid the same for each case. The two disadvantages to public defenders are that the
Much of what you are saying is wrong and horribly naive. So please don't cast aspersions on others.
A public defender works for the public defender's office
This is often not true. Lawyers in private practice are often asked, and sometimes ordered, to take on public defender duties. They are paid of course, but not as much as they make from their private clients.
The two disadvantages to public defenders are that they typically weren't successful enough in school to garner better job offers coming out of college or haven't distinguished themselves through their casework
That is the point. A PD is usually going to give you a 2nd rate defense. People with public defenders are more likely to be convicted or to be pushed into a lousy plea deal.
PD is usually going to give you a 2nd rate defense.
And you moved the goal post. Before you were saying people couldn't "can't afford a proper jury trial" but that is demonstrably false. They can get a proper jury trial with no cost to them as you just admitted. A PD may not be the best but can they do a proper job? If you or anyone has evidence that anything improper occurred then that case can be appealed and a mistrial declared. Do you have evidence to suggest that any public defender has not represented their client to the best of their ability?
People with public defenders are more likely to be convicted or to be pushed into a lousy plea deal.
What are the trials like in China that make them so much better?
I would not say that trials in China are "better", but they are better in some ways and worse in others.
The major problem with China's system is a lack of judicial independence. Judges are required to obey orders from the CCP. So someone convicted of a political crime is certainly going to be treated more fairly in America.
On the other hand, a normal quotidian criminal defendant of modest means is going to be treated more fairly in China.
America has an adversarial legal system. The prosecutor controls the investigation and has a vested interest in obtaining a conviction. The investigators are looking for incriminating evidence. If they accidentally stumble across exonerating evidence, they are legally required to turn it over to the defense, but they have plenty of incentive to avoid finding such evidence. The defense receives no public funding to conduct their own investigating, although rich people can pay for their own investigation.
China has an inquisitorial system and the court controls the investigation. The investigators are neutral and have no vested interest in either a conviction or acquittal. The investigators have no loyalty to either the prosecutor or the defense and seek out all the facts impartially, at least in theory.
IMO, the legal systems in both countries are deeply dysfunctional and unjust. I complain more about America's system because I live in America, I am an American citizen, and therefore my opinion should mean something. My opinion means nothing to China.
>The investigators are looking for incriminating evidence
Evidence that can and should only be obtained by legal means. Is Parallel Construction legal in China? Is there such a concept of illegally obtain evidence?
> Inquisition vs advocate
Not sure that is a hard choice.
>, the legal systems in both countries are deeply dysfunctional and unjust.
Measured against perfect anything is dysfunctional and unjust. Anything will work "good enough" with enough power and inertia.
Sorry, but I don't believe for a second that Chinese court investigators would be neutral.
In the same way that prosecutors in the US have little incentive to follow their mandate to turn over exonerating evidence, I would bet that the Chinese inquisitors have even less desire to do anything other than obtain a clean, fast conviction. Which means putting away the suspect at hand. Anything else would take tons of extra time. You really think those investigators have the light caseloads that allow thorou
A consultant is a person who borrows your watch, tells you what time it
is, pockets the watch, and sends you a bill for it.
China is not managed well? (Score:-1)
Re: (Score:2)
He went to prison for embarrassing the Chinese government. If this happened in America or EU, then they would go to prison for performing unethical experiments on humans.
In modern times, for good or for bad there is a large process before we try something on humans. As the past has shown that there have been a lot of death, and often unjust selection on who to experiment on. And many are suffering from the consequences after the fact.
but in the usa will get an real jury trail vs an s (Score:0, Troll)
but in the usa will get an real jury trail vs an show trail.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
but in the usa will get an real jury trail vs an show trail.
Most Americans can't afford a proper jury trial. They often can't even afford bail, so they sit in jail for years waiting for a trial date.
Much better to just take a plea deal for an immediate reduced sentence, whether you are guilty or not.
Per capita, America incarcerates four times as many people as China.
Re: (Score:-1)
Hold up... are you actually under the impression that you need to PAY for a trial by jury in the US? And that people are required to sit in jail for YEARS waiting on trial based upon financial resources??
That's an impressive level of stupidity.
The sixth amendment to the constitution guarantees a citizen's right to a trial by jury regardless of personal finances and also provides a right to a "speedy" trial... which is further protected from delay by the speedy trial act of 1974.
We have a highly concentrated
Re: (Score:4, Informative)
You don't need to Pay for a jury trial... However if you want a layer who just wasn't picked out of a pool of available lawyers being paid a "charity rate" to cover you for any prolonged legal action, you are going to need to pay a lot more. If you get the court provided lawyer his interest is to get this job over with as quickly as possible so they can work on something more profitable. So they will probably just try to settle out of court, or get you to plead guilty and take a lighter punishment.
If you
Re: (Score:1)
Nearly everything you just said is bullshit...
Obviously if you have a lot of money then you can afford to pay for a higher level of service but it's absolutely false that a public defender's best interest is to get your case over with as quickly as possible to "work on something more profitable". A public defender works for the public defender's office and there is no profitable vs unprofitable case for them, they're getting paid the same for each case. The two disadvantages to public defenders are that the
Re: (Score:5, Informative)
Nearly everything you just said is bullshit...
Much of what you are saying is wrong and horribly naive. So please don't cast aspersions on others.
A public defender works for the public defender's office
This is often not true. Lawyers in private practice are often asked, and sometimes ordered, to take on public defender duties. They are paid of course, but not as much as they make from their private clients.
The two disadvantages to public defenders are that they typically weren't successful enough in school to garner better job offers coming out of college or haven't distinguished themselves through their casework
That is the point. A PD is usually going to give you a 2nd rate defense. People with public defenders are more likely to be convicted or to be pushed into a lousy plea deal.
The richer you are, the mor
Re: (Score:0)
PD is usually going to give you a 2nd rate defense.
And you moved the goal post. Before you were saying people couldn't "can't afford a proper jury trial" but that is demonstrably false. They can get a proper jury trial with no cost to them as you just admitted. A PD may not be the best but can they do a proper job? If you or anyone has evidence that anything improper occurred then that case can be appealed and a mistrial declared. Do you have evidence to suggest that any public defender has not represented their client to the best of their ability?
People with public defenders are more likely to be convicted or to be pushed into a lousy plea deal.
You cann
Re:but in the usa will get an real jury trail vs a (Score:4, Interesting)
What are the trials like in China that make them so much better?
I would not say that trials in China are "better", but they are better in some ways and worse in others.
The major problem with China's system is a lack of judicial independence. Judges are required to obey orders from the CCP. So someone convicted of a political crime is certainly going to be treated more fairly in America.
On the other hand, a normal quotidian criminal defendant of modest means is going to be treated more fairly in China.
America has an adversarial legal system. The prosecutor controls the investigation and has a vested interest in obtaining a conviction. The investigators are looking for incriminating evidence. If they accidentally stumble across exonerating evidence, they are legally required to turn it over to the defense, but they have plenty of incentive to avoid finding such evidence. The defense receives no public funding to conduct their own investigating, although rich people can pay for their own investigation.
China has an inquisitorial system and the court controls the investigation. The investigators are neutral and have no vested interest in either a conviction or acquittal. The investigators have no loyalty to either the prosecutor or the defense and seek out all the facts impartially, at least in theory.
IMO, the legal systems in both countries are deeply dysfunctional and unjust. I complain more about America's system because I live in America, I am an American citizen, and therefore my opinion should mean something. My opinion means nothing to China.
Re: (Score:1)
>The investigators are looking for incriminating evidence
Evidence that can and should only be obtained by legal means. Is Parallel Construction legal in China? Is there such a concept of illegally obtain evidence?
> Inquisition vs advocate
Not sure that is a hard choice.
>, the legal systems in both countries are deeply dysfunctional and unjust.
Measured against perfect anything is dysfunctional and unjust. Anything will work "good enough" with enough power and inertia.
Re: (Score:2)
In the same way that prosecutors in the US have little incentive to follow their mandate to turn over exonerating evidence, I would bet that the Chinese inquisitors have even less desire to do anything other than obtain a clean, fast conviction. Which means putting away the suspect at hand. Anything else would take tons of extra time. You really think those investigators have the light caseloads that allow thorou