Chinese execution

[Andehh]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8433704.stm

Why is it causing such uproar? Its common knowledge that serious crimes out there are punishable by death and my god, 3kgs of Heroin is a fairly serious crime. Why should he have got anything less then death for committing such a crime? It keeps being repeated that he was suffering from bipolar disorder, yet he had no history of mental illness, and there was no proof that he suffered from any mental disorder, so why is it being hammered home that this guy shouldn't have been punished as the law saw fit?

Apparently he was given a suitcase in Poland and didn't have the mental capacity to think what it could be, in which case why was he allowed to fly on his own if he suffered from such mental issues? It is asked enough times ''did you pack your own luggage'' due to terrorism risks so how did it not occur to him that something might be amiss with the suitcase?

It seems like such a scam IMO, and I don't get why more people arn't standing up for the Chinese in their response to this?

[merdat]

Quite agree, and if he was that bad how did he find his way to the airport- mental disorder no excuse.

[Barakka]

"Communist Regime doesn't back down and give in to pressure from outside influences" - and we're to be surprised why exactly ?

[Lucio]

.....yet he had no history of mental illness, and there was no proof that he suffered from any mental disorder, so why is it being hammered home that this guy shouldn't have been punished as the law saw fit?...

You've hit upon the key reason, there was no proof because the chinese authorities refused to submit him for a psychiatric appraisal. As reported it seems that they weren't willing to entertain the possibility that they were wrong.

[KidChameleon]

Because he's British.

[Barrichello]

Because he's British.

Exactly, if he was from somewhere else, some 3rd world country for example it would be a non story.

Now apparently the Chinese ambassador of London has been "summoned" for a explanation and to be condemned by our government - what a joke. Im sure our government would rather of had the convicted offender in one of our cushty open prisons relaxing with his console and TV. How dare Brown and Milliband try and criticise China's Justice system when ours is such a joke, and try and give their opinion as if it is the general consensus of this country.

[Steve]

This affair raises a number of issues.

Firstly, the fact that we only really care when one of "our own" suffers. Most humans are selfish, at least in one way or another and I do not exclude myself from that - did I think about or have an opinion on China's execution of drug mules prior to this story? No. But of course the media will only make a big issue out of it if there's a "close to home" link or some other sensation, so we are in effect isolated until it suits a media network somewhere.

Secondly, it is saddening if people protested he was mentally ill and no effort whatsoever was made to establish whether or not this was really the case. It suggests a desire to make an example of somebody and demonstrate a resolution to stamp out drug runners without regard for due process.

Thirdly, who are we to dispute the laws of another country? Of course, as with the first point, it only becomes an issue when it affects "us". If we don't like the laws, we can apply pressure to have them changed, but if we don't want to be on the wrong end of those laws, we should probably stay away from that country - particularly if we do not have faith in their application of due process.

And finally, is executing a drug mule - the person not making most of the profit, the person looking for quick money, quite possibly in a tight spot, naive, misguided, poorly served by society - a just act? If we ignore the moral issues of execution, surely the mules are simply "fodder" in the hierarchy of illegal drug trafficking?

Oh, and I should add that I cast my eyes over the front page of the Daily Mail today (in my parent's house, I do not read it, I'm glad to say), to see a line about an opinion piece inside arguing that a nation that reveres a "junky like Kate Moss" has no moral right to question China's acts. Erm, OK, good sensational statement there, but, suspending most of our common sense (like I'm sure the editor did), surely if we revere drug addicts, surely we should protest drug mule executions, as they're cutting off the supply lines? I don't think I need to say how stupid that, or the article in the mail, sounds.

[Lunar Wolf]

there's a lot more sides to this coin then I think many are willing to entertain. While I do agree with Chinese law in the case of importing enough heroin to kill 20,000 people and therefore a death sentence is warranted. I don't think everyone who is vocal about getting what he deserved regardless of having bi-polar really knows what that condition is, its not about being happy and sad but it can cause an individual to be extremely delusional - that said the British government harping on about how they have evidence which shows he may have been, they need to release that into the public domain or shut up.

And all the people harping on about how the death sentence is wrong and how the Chinese are barbaric for using it, go have a look at the US of A.

[Andehh]

If he had the mental state to fly to China & had plans on what to do there (drugs or not) then he had the mental state to work out being given a suitcase, without checking the contents might be a bit suspicious. The Chinese did what their law states, job done.

[this_is_gav]

Firstly, the fact that we only really care when one of "our own" suffers. Most humans are selfish, at least in one way or another and I do not exclude myself from that - did I think about or have an opinion on China's execution of drug mules prior to this story? No. But of course the media will only make a big issue out of it if there's a "close to home" link or some other sensation, so we are in effect isolated until it suits a media network somewhere.

'Sensation' being the key word.

It makes for a nice, juicy story to have 2 countries appearing to go for the throat of the other... a bit of hype from the media to spice things up a bit is in their own interests.

Media wise, it's got little to do with the crime, the punishment, the family, the suffering... just grasp the story with both hands and make out that we're on the verge of conflict. Frankly, it's exploitation.

In a couple of days, save for the odd column writer, we'll have heard the last of it... in the meantime, it'll sell a few more papers or get a few more viewers.

[Lucio]

If he had the mental state to fly to China & had plans on what to do there (drugs or not) then he had the mental state to work out being given a suitcase, without checking the contents might be a bit suspicious. The Chinese did what their law states, job done.

Ummm no, he probably didn't. After all remember he was out in China in the first place as the drug runners had promised him they'd help him launch a pop career. If he was in a depressive state at the time, any good news like this would be enough enticement to get him to accept what he was told without thinking.

Either way, what we have here is a vulnerable person who was exploited by drug runners and who was executed by an uncaring state. I have no doubt whatsoever that the gentleman in question didn't realise what risks he was taking by accepting the suitcase, nor do I agree that the death penalty was the right consequence for the crime.

[Rave]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8433704.stm

Why is it causing such uproar? Its common knowledge that serious crimes out there are punishable by death and my god, 3kgs of Heroin is a fairly serious crime. Why should he have got anything less then death for committing such a crime?

Well, because capital punishment is barbarism, pure and simple.

It keeps being repeated that he was suffering from bipolar disorder, yet he had no history of mental illness, and there was no proof that he suffered from any mental disorder,

Says who?

Sally Rowen, of the legal charity Reprieve, said a report from a consultant forensic psychologist had diagnosed him with bipolar disorder and delusional psychosis.

The circumstances in which this report was written are not made clear, but its mere existence hardly suggests that there was "no proof" as you say. At the very least, there's a good case that he was bipolar, which any decent judicial system would have bothered to investigate.

so why is it being hammered home that this guy shouldn't have been punished as the law saw fit?

Gee, I don't know....maybe because some of us think that their judicial system is 1) wrong and 2) created in the first place by an unelected, dictatorial regime?

Apparently he was given a suitcase in Poland and didn't have the mental capacity to think what it could be, in which case why was he allowed to fly on his own if he suffered from such mental issues?

Do you actually know what bipolar disorder is?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bipolar_disorder

The idea that the mere fact that he may* have suffered from bipolar disorder would have stopped him travelling is naive, and frankly ignorant, in the extreme. Stephen Fry wasn't diagnosed until he was 37, by which time he had starred in several TV programmes and written a novel (which I've read and found enjoyable, if a bit brash). Having bipolar disorder can make you do stupid things; it by no means makes you incapable of doing normal things like getting on an aeroplane.

*since he's now dead, we'll never know for sure.

It is asked enough times ''did you pack your own luggage'' due to terrorism risks so how did it not occur to him that something might be amiss with the suitcase?

Actually I don't often get asked this when I fly, maybe 1 in 3 times. And in fact, the question was originally asked long before 9/11 because of the risk of drug smuggling, but hey.

It seems like such a scam IMO, and I don't get why more people arn't standing up for the Chinese in their response to this?

Oh right, so standing up for the rights of a man who, in the opinion of a consultant forensic psychologist, and several witnesses who have come forward since, was mentally ill is a 'scam' is it? Nice of you to compare me with, say, the people who send bulk emails from Nigeria, operate boiler rooms, or cold call people offering to write their debts off for a large fee.

<Edit - Insult removed. You should know better than that, Rave. If not, you need to re-read our rules. Saracen >

[Rave]

Exactly, if he was from somewhere else, some 3rd world country for example it would be a non story.

To the British media, yes. But there are plenty of people who do care, Amnesty being probably the most prominent organisation. I've been a paid up member of Amnesty (to the tune of a fiver a month) for nigh on ten years, back from when £60 a year was a non-trivial amount to me.

Now apparently the Chinese ambassador of London has been "summoned" for a explanation and to be condemned by our government - what a joke. Im sure our government would rather of had the convicted offender in one of our cushty open prisons relaxing with his console and TV. How dare Brown and Milliband try and criticise China's Justice system when ours is such a joke, and try and give their opinion as if it is the general consensus of this country.

Our government doesn't deliberately kill the mentally ill. That's not to say that the mentally ill don't die regularly in our prisons- they do, and I'm angry about that too. But they're not deliberately killed by the state.

And all the people harping on about how the death sentence is wrong and how the Chinese are barbaric for using it, go have a look at the US of A.

Erm yes- see above link re Amnesty. I would never travel to a state of the USA that had the death penalty. And I certainly would never travel anywhere that thinks the death penalty is an appropriate punishment for drug smuggling. I'd pay considerably more for my air fare to Australia to avoid going via Singapore, for example. Why take the risk with these nasty regimes?

[yamangman]

Aside from the fact I completely disagree and think state permitted murder is a barbaric anachronism, it's interesting that the '26,800' of peoples' lives that the Chinese government 'saved' by murdering this man would also have had the death penalty visited upon them if they were found with 3 grams of heroin. But in the words of Andehh, job done, right?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8433704.stm

Why is it causing such uproar? Its common knowledge that serious crimes out there are punishable by death and my god, 3kgs of Heroin is a fairly serious crime. Why should he have got anything less then death for committing such a crime? It keeps being repeated that he was suffering from bipolar disorder, yet he had no history of mental illness, and there was no proof that he suffered from any mental disorder, so why is it being hammered home that this guy shouldn't have been punished as the law saw fit?

Apparently he was given a suitcase in Poland and didn't have the mental capacity to think what it could be, in which case why was he allowed to fly on his own if he suffered from such mental issues? It is asked enough times ''did you pack your own luggage'' due to terrorism risks so how did it not occur to him that something might be amiss with the suitcase?

It seems like such a scam IMO, and I don't get why more people arn't standing up for the Chinese in their response to this?

[Infinite]

And I certainly would never travel anywhere that thinks the death penalty is an appropriate punishment for drug smuggling. I'd pay considerably more for my air fare to Australia to avoid going via Singapore, for example. Why take the risk with these nasty regimes?

LOL, I'm guessing you've never even been to Southeast Asia then.

Is there actually any risk at all? Unless you're a drug mule or ignorant enough to accept packages from random people promising you a pop career.

I'd have to agree however if the story about him believing he could start a pop career in China looking like that, he must have been mentally ill.

[TheAnimus]

LOL, I'm guessing you've never even been to Southeast Asia then.

Is there actually any risk at all? Unless you're a drug mule or ignorant enough to accept packages from random people promising you a pop career.

I'd have to agree however if the story about him believing he could start a pop career in China looking like that, he must have been mentally ill.

This is what really 'got my goat' when I was in Vietnam last month, the amount of spoilt little white kids who think of south east asia as a third world country to be exploited for their own touristic ideals. From complaining about all the food been rice based to how not enough people speak english.

When your abroad in someone elses country you play by their rules and and make sure not to offend their beliefs, your a guest. Even if that means having to wear trousers in very high temps rather than shorts, which is a horrific torture to a mild weather spoilt white boy like me.

Its not exactly secret information the penalties faced by drug drafficers, even those carrying personal use quantities.

The circumstances in which this report was written are not made clear, but its mere existence hardly suggests that there was "no proof" as you say. At the very least, there's a good case that he was bipolar, which any decent judicial system would have bothered to investigate.

The problem is in a place like China you can't simply say I have bi-polar disorder. If he is so vulnerable that he would be manipulated into grabbing a bag without asking any questions, then what on earth was he doing flying to the otherside of the world, rather than blaming somewhere like China for doing EXACTLY what anyone who knows just a little about them would expect them too. Why did England fail this man so badly as to let him in-society un-helped.

Actually I don't often get asked this when I fly, maybe 1 in 3 times. And in fact, the question was originally asked long before 9/11 because of the risk of drug smuggling, but hey.

I thought it was a result of Lockerbie bombing?

And you should be asked if every time you fly, I have been on the last 30+ flights I've taken this year (including Krackow airport!). Each airport has a legal obligation to do this at the point of baggage check in, or boading pass printing if your doing online checkin. I would find it highly unlikely that any airline would mess this up, as its part of the script and on some of the off the shelf software, they have to click to indicate they've asked it.

When been searched at customs, they will normally ask the same question true, but then its not a contractual requirement, but them gathering information.

Now the punishment aside, I'm more worried we let people like that loose in the world, anyone who would lie to airport security questions is a tiny bit of a worry in this climate.