Rich Kid in Car Accident

Damingli85 said:

First, most of you might have heard about this. For me I was still in school and learning economics, so I was under a rock. I am reading the WSJ today, and I realized that this douchebag Hu Bin in Hangzhou hit and killed a 25 year old man, and was only given 3 years? What the hell happened to China? 3 year hitting someone with a car? I mean isn't it illegal to race in China? China seriously need to cut the corruption, and give this kid the bang bang to the dome.

I am sorry, but if it were my son, I would have torn off this Hu Bin's arms and legs off with my bare hands.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Then what do you suggest? Sent him to the gallow or perhaps the firing squad. Come on, I have been hearing alot of poor people against rich people kind of craps in China.

The main thing is, it doesn't matter whether it was the rich kid or some poor asshole who ram into anyone. The law should be equal. I bet that if it was a poor kid that hit and kill some rich 25 year old guys, nobody will complain.

This is all typical poor vs rich scenario.

rhino123 said:

Then what do you suggest? Sent him to the gallow or perhaps the firing squad. Come on, I have been hearing alot of poor people against rich people kind of craps in China.

The main thing is, it doesn't matter whether it was the rich kid or some poor asshole who ram into anyone. The law should be equal. I bet that if it was a poor kid that hit and kill some rich 25 year old guys, nobody will complain.

This is all typical poor vs rich scenario.

Click to expand...

no, the point is a poor kid tho hit and killed someone with a car is probably going to get life sentence or even death penalty. like u said, law should be equal to everyone, but it's not.

T-U-P said:

no, the point is a poor kid tho hit and killed someone with a car is probably going to get life sentence or even death penalty. like u said, law should be equal to everyone, but it's not.

Click to expand...

Why do you say that? Does that apply to what happen in Canada or the rest of the world? Why is it automatic that if a rich fellow knock and kill someone, he or she is immediately branded as the axis of evil? And if it is some poor fellow that hit and kill some rich fellow, he or she is branded as national hero?

As you can see this news is one sided, the writer is trying to instigate the public into hating that rich kid and trying to get the public to pressurize the authority into sending a much harsher punishment for that rich kid. That is just typical poor vs rich crap.

I know law is not always equal to everyone and tends to lean toward the person that wrote it, but don't we have standardise law? U hit someone, injure him, you get fine, u hit someone and kill him, u get jailed and that is that.

rhino123 said:

Why do you say that? Does that apply to what happen in Canada or the rest of the world? Why is it automatic that if a rich fellow knock and kill someone, he or she is immediately branded as the axis of evil? And if it is some poor fellow that hit and kill some rich fellow, he or she is branded as national hero?

As you can see this news is one sided, the writer is trying to instigate the public into hating that rich kid and trying to get the public to pressurize the authority into sending a much harsher punishment for that rich kid. That is just typical poor vs rich crap.

Click to expand...

this has nothing to do with canada or anywhere else in the world, the situation we are talking about is in china and china alone. people doesn't have any problems with rich people or poor people unless the law is applied unequally. NO ONE said the rich kid was automatically evil when he killed the guy, people were simply complaining about the fact that you can buy your way out of criminal activities if you are rich enough; therefore they are demanding a harsher sentence.

u hit someone and kill him, u get jailed and that is that.

Click to expand...

no, that's not that. there's a BIG difference between getting a 5 year jail sentence and a life sentence. a case like this can be seen as either a simple traffic accident (5 year) or endangering public (life sentence), the power to decide which one to use is with the judge. It is very possible to a rich person to use money to sway the judge's opinion (either direct bribery or hire a good lawyer or both), whereas a poor person would be unable to do any of these.

I think Poster 5 got it right.

HoweverIn NZ a few days ago a judge handed out a sentence of 3yrs to a young man who in a fit of road rage assulted a elderly gentleman (70 yish) who died of injuries when he fell to the ground after receiving several head punches. In NZ he'll be out in 2 as most of them only have to do 2/3rds of the sentence to be eligible fo parole.

After all that the defendants car a BMW (so was the defendant rich) was only very slightly dinged, nothing serious that $300 wouldnt fix. Meanwhile the old man drove what looked like a second hand toyota or nissan van.

T-U-P said:

this has nothing to do with canada or anywhere else in the world, the situation we are talking about is in china and china alone. people doesn't have any problems with rich people or poor people unless the law is applied unequally. NO ONE said the rich kid was automatically evil when he killed the guy, people were simply complaining about the fact that you can buy your way out of criminal activities if you are rich enough; therefore they are demanding a harsher sentence.

Click to expand...

How is that when it involve a rich person that it suddenly became clear that he or she is using money to buy his or her way out, irregardless of whatever sentence that the judge place on him. Is there any data out there that actually show that if a poor person knock and kill someone, what is he or she being sentensed to?

My point is this, the news is one sided. It kept on reminding people of how rich that convicted is and how poor the victim is. But the truth is, did we actually look or are well verse in China's law to know what punishment is suppose to be met out in a case like this. Perhaps three years is the maximum you get?

And as to you saying the poor would get five years or harsher punishment if such case was reverse. What is the proof of that? Any data to show? Or is it just automatic that when the poor with no means of monetary defence to... say, 'bribe someone up there', would immediately be punishable by death?

rhino123 said:

How is that when it involve a rich person that it suddenly became clear that he or she is using money to buy his or her way out, irregardless of whatever sentence that the judge place on him. Is there any data out there that actually show that if a poor person knock and kill someone, what is he or she being sentensed to?

My point is this, the news is one sided. It kept on reminding people of how rich that convicted is and how poor the victim is. But the truth is, did we actually look or are well verse in China's law to know what punishment is suppose to be met out in a case like this. Perhaps three years is the maximum you get?

And as to you saying the poor would get five years or harsher punishment if such case was reverse. What is the proof of that? Any data to show? Or is it just automatic that when the poor with no means of monetary defence to... say, 'bribe someone up there', would immediately be punishable by death?

Click to expand...

most poor people can't afford cars, and when they do have a car they drive carefully so they don't damage their car. so you'll rarely see incidents where a poor person road kills.

but there are cases such as this:

Li Jing killed 2 people while drunk and driving, sentenced to death. this was charged to endangering public safety. does an extra death bring this much difference in the sentence? no it doesn't. because Sun Wei Ming killed 4 while drunk and driving, yet he got a life sentence.

on the other hand, this fellow, Xu Ting, went to an ABM with 175 yuan on his account but the ABM displays 175000 yuan due to a system error. So he withdrew the 175000 and got sentence to 5 years. One can argue that he took the money from the bank illegally, but that's the system's fault, not entirely his (do note that the bank holds no legal responsibility if they give you less money). Would you argue that the consequence for killing a person and taking 175000 yuan should be about the same? btw he initially got life sentence in the first trial.

When you stretch the argument and talk about extremes of course you can make yourself seem right. However the point is, this type of stuff constantly happen in China. If you want to talk about if the punishment fits. Right now in China it is three years for a traffic violation, however if it is endangerment to public safety then the punishment is much harsher. Now lets see which one this incident fits into.

What is a traffic violation? According to wikipedia it is, "A violation of the rules of the road" From what we all should know the following should fit it, speeding, improper passing, going through red light etc. Maybe we can also include drunk driving.

What is endangerment of public safety? Deliberate violation of governing traffic laws that can most likely put civilians in harms way. This kid illegally modified his car, then deliberately (he is not drunk) drove his souped up race car down a street in an urban area many miles/km over the limit.

"Any person who has reached the age of 14 but not the age of 16 and who commits homicide, inflicting serious bodily injury, robbery, arson, habitual theft or any other crime seriously undermining social order shall bear criminal responsibility."-Chinese Criminal Law

What is more important is that his violation killed a person making this accident a homicide. Which brings me to this part of the criminal law. "[Article 133] Whoever negligently kills another shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than five years; if the circumstances are especially flagrant, the offender shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than five years. Where this Law has other provisions, such provisions shall prevail. "-Chinese Criminal law

Hu Bin was pretty much FLAGRANT or very much indifferent of the law. He illegally modified his car, he went over the speed limit, and then he didn't call the ambulance which is required by the law. An average lawyer would have nailed Hu Bin and locked him up for the no less than 5 years. I mean I am just an accountant and I can already use the law to poo on Hu Bin.

I don't know if you are reading this wrong or just getting the wrong idea. The bottom line of the people's anger is not just that this guy got away due to money, it is the fact that he has to spend only 3 years for killing someone. Let me tell you this, that 1 million yuan or 165kUSD plus the 3 years of a roof over his head and 3 meals is a very small price to pay for killing someone.

T-U-P said:

on the other hand, this fellow, Xu Ting, went to an ABM with 175 yuan on his account but the ABM displays 175000 yuan due to a system error. So he withdrew the 175000 and got sentence to 5 years. One can argue that he took the money from the bank illegally, but that's the system's fault, not entirely his (do note that the bank holds no legal responsibility if they give you less money). Would you argue that the consequence for killing a person and taking 175000 yuan should be about the same? btw he initially got life sentence in the first trial.

Click to expand...

Wow. Although it's still a crime, how could this fellow possibly do anybody real harm by taking the money. That amount of money is nothing to the bank. I would say 5 months would be more appropriate.

T-U-P said:

most poor people can't afford cars, and when they do have a car they drive carefully so they don't damage their car. so you'll rarely see incidents where a poor person road kills.

but there are cases such as this:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Li Jing killed 2 people while drunk and driving, sentenced to death. this was charged to endangering public safety. does an extra death bring this much difference in the sentence? no it doesn't. because Sun Wei Ming killed 4 while drunk and driving, yet he got a life sentence.

on the other hand, this fellow, Xu Ting, went to an ABM with 175 yuan on his account but the ABM displays 175000 yuan due to a system error. So he withdrew the 175000 and got sentence to 5 years. One can argue that he took the money from the bank illegally, but that's the system's fault, not entirely his (do note that the bank holds no legal responsibility if they give you less money). Would you argue that the consequence for killing a person and taking 175000 yuan should be about the same? btw he initially got life sentence in the first trial.

Click to expand...

Actually if you look at the report closely. This fellow Li Jing, is not only charge with a simple accident. First, he is drunk... not really very drunk because according to the report he still had the ability to control the car and when he knock into the first person, he didn't stop and still try to escape. Then he knock into the second. All the crap about he is poor and he is remorse are all his defence to reduce the sentence.

Another guy, Sun Wei Ming, in the report it didn't say he is rich or what... but was charge in a different court. May I remind you, judges are also humans and can be sway by many factors, not necessary money.

And all the report never mention anything about bribes. So it still didn't make sense that why are we so against the rich and that they ought to have harsher punishment?