<br>Zhongguang Wang Beijing January 16,tiffany outlet, according to Voice of China "News" 8:50 report, Yunnan Edition "Xu Ting" Ho Peng to be released from prison! The banking system problems due to even take 42 million yuan and sentenced to life imprisonment by the court to theft of students, after serving more than eight years later, on the 12th finally got the Supreme People's Court in Yunnan Province Higher People's Court review of their commuted ruling - the life sentence was reduced to eight and half years. This means that, today, spent eight years in prison, more than a fourth of Yunnan Province Peng will be out of prison, regained liberty. Why the decision will be twists and turns in the eight years later? Here we connect professor of China University of Political Science Hongdao De:<br> <br>Technical evaluation will determine the nature of the case<br> <br>Moderator: Prof. Hong, hello. The case of Peng was known as Yunnan Edition "Xu Ting", the case of Xu Ting before and what is different?<br> <br>Hongdao De: Judging from the current master,http://www.psl.ne.jp, Peng Xu Ting case and apply the law are similar because withdrawals from ATM machines, found to be able to take on more, and then repeated in the ATM machine to withdraw money, they have been identified as theft national financial institutions property, applicable legal provisions concerning larceny in the first session were sentenced to God this sentence in minimum penalty of life imprisonment, because stealing huge amounts of national financial institutions are not of two kinds of punishment and the death penalty , he was sentenced to life imprisonment, but it is clear that this decision is very unreasonable,http://www.meishizhan.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=15832&extra=, Xu Ting case since the first instance verdict did not take effect until it found a very unreasonable phenomenon,http://www.cecyteo.edu.mx/site/index.php, and later after the second instance court remand.<br> <br>Peng's case now, because when people are not aware of this issue, so begin a sentence of life imprisonment, found during execution sentence is too heavy indeed, under such circumstances, the High People's Court started the special program, after the Supreme Court later approved in accordance with how much time he actually served commuted give it much time, from this perspective, it should be said that the two judgments are common. But this decision reflects the situation from now on, there is a very different place particular concern is that Xu Ting finally through experts, technical appraisal is indeed a problem ATM machines, credit cards,http://www.jyukenjyuku.jp, Ting Xu Hao he had used savings card or, in itself is no money, ATM machines have a problem, give him pay.<br> <br>Peng case so far, is not clear is the ATM machine money, or Ho Peng card inside itself so much money, he was inside the card, such as more than 420,http://www.hanazonohifuku.com,000, he withdrawals at the ATM machine when not ATM machine to him, but Peng themselves have so much money, as his card which is where the money, that's another question,http://www.zyzhongchou.com/phpwind/read.php?tid=1641393&ds=1, we must first identify a problem in the end is what is card which can take the money or card inside the ATM machine money is the problem, take a one million dollars to him, Peng this case so far, this issue is unclear.<br> <br>Banks need to be held accountable<br> <br>Moderator: You also mentioned that ATM machines are likely to have problems, we have doubts, in this case, the banks have no responsibility in the end? Further side said Peng could appeal to the Supreme Court drew request commuted Peng guilty, do you think the possibility of not guilty life?<br> <br>Hongdao De: commuted innocence possibility depends on the fact that the credit card or if Peng savings card inside that he really wealthy beyond his current amount of money taken out, Ho Peng theft does not exist, and we say that they pocket money no matter how you spend can not constitute theft,Tiffany Gioielli, may constitute the other charges, but the theft is certainly possible, because we say that theft is certainly possible, we say that there must be a way of larceny from steal someone else's pocket called secret theft, others put the money in my pocket, I would spend my own pocket money, the perspective from which it is inexplicable constitutes theft is impossible, which is the future After technical evaluation, said it was not a problem ATM machine is Peng used his savings cards have so much money, this money may be others misuse, such as banking card misuse to him hit him inside, is this case, certainly do not constitute a theft Peng,Parajumpers paris, naturally, does not constitute a theft should be acquitted,canada goose pas cher, then get state compensation.<br> <br>Banks, in any case have to bear some responsibility, if they mistakenly hit the ATM machine into one million, they may constitute perjury, when judicial authorities to track down the case when the banks did not say the truth,http://www.cronicasdelanzarote.es/spip.php?article2226, which is the standard perjury, even problems with ATM machines, banks should also bear responsibility for the civilian aspects, that is for your own equipment management,http://www.matsue-yado.com/otoku/clip.cgi??,louboutin femme, repair is not timely, not strictly caused by infringement of others, we should bear corresponding civil liability .<br><br>
DavidCadogan.ca Forums » DavidCadogan.ca
in any case have to bear some responsibility
(1 post)-
Posted 10 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.