christian louboutin

9 Jul

Response to the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court ruling the legal procedure, does not exist in malpractices for personal gain

“For each decision, each one has its different understanding, the court can’t hear which side, over to the voice which side.” Yesterday, ShengGaoYuan two, says the Supreme Court for the LiChangKui second sentence “serious prudent, according to procedures, legitimate”. First of all, this case “no cover-up, LiChangKui live in the countryside,” family economic difficulties, the more there is no “background”, also the victim’s money is difficult, the more impossible to bribe the judge, and the judge was in its discretion range to judge.

They introduced, judgment not a two the judge made, but after the trial committee. According to the relevant laws and regulations, may be sentenced to death in the case of the judicial committee decided to discuss. And the Supreme Court trial committee now has 27 members by the court, leadership, business backbone composition, every time want members can discuss, more than half and half members (14) agree to the above the verdict, can make a judgment, LiChangKui case is no exception. Therefore, “the program is completely legal, evidence, but also clear in the application of the law, you have a different opinion.”

LiChangKui case of folk contradiction, social harm is relatively small

The case of LiChangKui social damage DuoDa exactly? ZhaoJianSheng first told a case. In a village, a thief through the distinct spots a family always found no one, one night he was over the wall in, didn’t meet the back from a business trip owners, yell, scream and resist, the thief took out in advance of the sword to kill, and took things escape. At that time, the village resident families tension, fear, in succession, anti-theft window of guard against theft outfit. But also in this area, the contradiction of a couple, husband wife, mother-in-law all killed. And this became a village resident ablaze talk of, they blamed the man to cruel, not filial piety.

These two cases represent the intentional homicide cases of two types, one kind is seriously endanger public of intentional homicide, and the other is the folk contradiction, marriage and family, because neighbour disputes or by intentional homicide. The first is not specific to the object of public security, has a great impact, social harmfulness great; The second is a specific object, social harmfulness some relatively small.

And LiChangKui case, the defendant and the victim two in the same village, LiChangKui back to WangGuFei mentioned closer, because two happened only LiChangKui disputes from outside the back and implemented a crime. Therefore, this case to the second type.

“Kill people for a life” and “kill a less traditional kill” idea has differences

“Is also the death penalty, social harm, will differentiate between different.” ZhaoJianSheng said, the Supreme Court demands, the folk contradiction, marriage and family, because the contradiction or the neighborhood dispute case, caused by the death penalty for to be very careful. This is the criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy “” implemented, it is also the national standing in society, make overall Angle of criminal justice policies. This and the Chinese traditional consciousness of “kill people for a life” idea to have the certain differences.

In 2007, the state will throughout all the provinces of the death penalty review power into the Supreme Court. This year in overhaul of the criminal law and abolished the death penalty 13. “The state of the death penalty after strict control, cut getting tight.” The Supreme Court also issued some guidance, all over the court case as a reference.

“I’m thinking, family members to kill to treatment is with trauma? Network on one of ShaSheng is called a progress of consciousness?” ZhaoJianSheng said, “you killed him, his family and to kill you, cause cause are reported when?!?!?!” At present the whole society or ingrained “kill people for a life”, “homomorphisms revenge” consciousness, and our judicial philosophy demands a less killed, and death. Now many countries have abolished the death penalty. Therefore, when the judge to deprive a person’s life, the inevitable to transactions, want to consider all kinds of things.
ChristianLouboutinshoes
Not necessarily light, to surrender a combination of factors to consider
Christian Louboutin Sandals
Internet users of hot debate about whether from death became the “surrender” brand. ZhaoJianSheng said, is one of the top surrendered the criminal law is an important content, a legal light source is the plot to surrender “go away, don’t kill” wartime captives, and collapse the enemy, preferential treatment is victory over magic weapon. And the law stipulate that the goal is to turn themselves in, differentiation, crime, education reform the disintegration of the criminals.
christian louboutin online sale
He also says, law, to surrender “can” light punishment, but not necessarily to light punishment, some crime if the circumstances are especially bad, social harmfulness great case, don’t light punishment. But the purpose of the legislation from the point of view, is encouraging criminals in surrender. LiChangKui’s case, he is indeed a surrender of the plot, this is about to see the judge to the specific situation analysis to judge whether applicable to surrender. “If surrender in specific sentencing in must be reflected, the function of the law cannot fully play out.”
designer shoes
TianChengYou said, if a man have surrendered to the heart of the step to repentance, and truthfully account, you will get some tolerance. No one will choose or later surrendered. “The whole society should be more rational, tolerance some.”
high heel shoes
-answer

Why not sentenced to death?
manolo blahnik
People are concerned about the most, is with LiChangKui raped and murdered girl is surrendered, and killed the boy, the circumstances of the crime than medicine home xin is “bad”, why all the death penalty and LiChangKui sentenced to SiHuan? To this, ZhaoJianSheng said, people will different cases, it is normal thinking, compared to people court but explain reason, it’s a difficult problem. Because the judge as a national criminal judicial policy executives, control the life and death, kill or not kill power? Whether a man is sentenced to capital punishment is necessary? He will consider more than the general common people. The law is not only to punish a person, also want to save a person.

TianChengYou, said LiChangKui and victims are neighbors, and have feelings before two have disputes, and civil disputes, the crime have certain reasons. The law is not hard to 1 + 1 = 2 that situation, or otherwise it will become law concept. “He said, a judge, as long as all, according to law, be legal procedures in the applicable law for is can have a discussion of the space.” Zhaotong city of then verdict and the Supreme Court’s decision not though, but the same is to act on careful attitude towards made by law. “

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: