Drug smuggler Akmal Shaikh executed

never2fast

I am suprised that no one mentioned this, but if this man was let off, what about the locals who are facing the same fate for 1kg of the drug? where is the justice in that, so its really change the whole law or he has to face what locals would face for the same crime.

I do not agree with capital punishment on first instance of any crime (maybe except the worst torture/muders) but I think it is appropriate for serious re-offenders.

RobbieTheRobber

never2fast wrote: »

I am suprised that no one mentioned this, but if this man was let off, what about the locals who are facing the same fate for 1kg of the drug? where is the justice in that, so its really change the whole law or he has to face what locals would face for the same crime.

I do not agree with capital punishment on first instance of any crime (maybe except the worst torture/muders) but I think it is appropriate for serious re-offenders.

Im sure its come up already in this thread but the man had a history of mental illness there are exemption in chinese law to allow leniancy for people sufferring from mental illness.

So no law change would be needed and the same law that was being appealed for use here is available for all victims of the Chinese justice system

never2fast

when you say a history of mental illness, whats that based on?

I am just asking cause apart from the crappy song and other people's opinions, I read in the BBC news there is no prior medical records available.

mr_edge_to_you

He went to China. Got caught doing something he shouldn't have been doing. The law of the land is the law and if if you get caught in a place with tough justice systems well then so be it.

I remember a case as well a few years back where an Irish student was drunk and started acting the bollox in front of an important national monument (mooning local guards etc) and was sentenced to a few lashes of a whip. Human rights people were giving out.

If you travel abroad you should respect the laws of that country.

Also, when you commit a crime in other countries you are dealing with the same justice system as other people in that country. You mightn't favour their methods but it is fair in the sense that it applies to everyone in that jurisdiction.

InKonspikuou2

This mental illness is just a way of the Brits complaining about the death penalty without upsetting their good buddies the Americans. He had no history or medical records to prove he had this illness. If i was defending this fella i would have gone with that defense too.

He smuggled a huge amount of drugs in a country with a very strict punishment for said crime and he paid the price of his life. This argument is simply gonna be whether you agree with the death penalty or not.

me_right_one

El Weirdo wrote: »

What? The "OMFG WHAT ABOUT YOUR OWN BRAIN AND MOUTH" shite? Bollocks.

Jesus fucking Christ, not everyone is as smart as you seem to think you are.

Also, you don't just need representation at the trial. Who is going to advise you whilst you are being interviewed after your arrest?

Relax there lad. No need to get in a huff just cos your wrong.

I never said the right to representation should be done away with, what I said was, arch criminals, who probably have more wealth than the barristers representing them, can fcuk off with their free legal aid.

And if someone genuinely cant afford a barrister, DIY. Barristers are only people too, they had to learn from scratch, and everyone in the country did the leaving cert! The law is written down for all citizens to see, if I was in that predicament, I'd rouse myself to get a handle on it. You're innocent until proven guilty. Just cos you have a lawyer there wont get you off the hook!

Yerman in china didnt cop-on to himself, and now it has cost him his life.

General Zod

hitlersson666


Edgy Name. please share more of your wisdom.

laugh

Does China buy anything from the Western world? Or is all the cash just flowing one direction? If they have a problem with them, shut up an stop trading with them.

givyjoe81

me_right_one wrote: »

Relax there lad. No need to get in a huff just cos your wrong.

I never said the right to representation should be done away with, what I said was, arch criminals, who probably have more wealth than the barristers representing them, can fcuk off with their free legal aid.

And if someone genuinely cant afford a barrister, DIY. Barristers are only people too, they had to learn from scratch, and everyone in the country did the leaving cert! The law is written down for all citizens to see, if I was in that predicament, I'd rouse myself to get a handle on it. You're innocent until proven guilty. Just cos you have a lawyer there wont get you off the hook!

Yerman in china didnt cop-on to himself, and now it has cost him his life.

You have been watching way too much Ally McBeal or whatever, walking into any courtroom for whatever reason you are there is a recipe for disaster. Plus the judge will be less than sypmpathetic with your ruff round the edges unfamiliary with court room etiquette.

walshb

The guy smuggled 4 kg Heroin? into China. Then, the red herrings came out about bipolar. The Chinese found no case of mental illness whatsoever.
The Chinese cannot afford to pick and choose who they do and do
not execute. And, does anyone really believe that Gordon Brown or any other
establishment Brit gives a toss about this guy. After all, is he British? I mean, really British in their eyes?

Stercus Accidit

The british government recently agreed to deport an autistic to be tried in the US for hacking into a government database looking for "ufo's"

The difference here is it was the US who demanded it, a country which uses torture none the less, but its the US so its ok.


Now that same british government whines that a drug smuggler is being tried and charged by local laws, where he actually committed a crime, rather than through a computer.


This is high hypocrisy.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/Tag/mckinnon - This is the link about the British "hacker" with mental problems, no british intervention here.

Mossy Monk

Went to China with 4kg of Heroin

FAIL

fitz0

me_right_one wrote: »

And if someone genuinely cant afford a barrister, DIY. Barristers are only people too, they had to learn from scratch, and everyone in the country did the leaving cert! The law is written down for all citizens to see, if I was in that predicament, I'd rouse myself to get a handle on it. You're innocent until proven guilty. Just cos you have a lawyer there wont get you off the hook!

Spoken like someone who has never seen the inside of a courtroom, except maybe on TV. You honestly think that reading up on the law, studying (no matter how hard) for the few months before you stand trial gives you the same chance as even the least qualified barrister? They didn't study for years for the craic, they studied for years because thats what it takes to be a competent barrister with even a basic understanding of the many laws, rules and unspoken understandings that apply in a courtroom. /legal rant.

As for your ideas on legal reform either you're seriously misguided or

Seaneh

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

The british government recently agreed to deport an autistic to be tried in the US for hacking into a government database looking for "ufo's"

The difference here is it was the US who demanded it, a country which uses torture none the less, but its the US so its ok.


Now that same british government whines that a drug smuggler is being tried and charged by local laws, where he actually committed a crime, rather than through a computer.


This is high hypocrisy.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/Tag/mckinnon - This is the link about the British "hacker" with mental problems, no british intervention here.

He is not autistic, he has Aspergers, a massively different condition and no excuse for doing something so ****ing stupid.

[/edit]
Not massively different, but not the same either, it's like comparing a flesh wound to having a hole in your chest/
[/edit]

speedboatchase

The Guardian wrote the first article I had read about this guy a few days ago and I was amazed to see that the entire article, there was no mention whatsoever of what his crime is, just trying to infantilise him as someone who had no idea what they were doing and should be let go. Obviously the sentence doesn't fit the crime but that's the problem with committing big crimes in other countries, especially China

walshb

speedboatchase wrote: »

The Guardian wrote the first article I had read about this guy a few days ago and I was amazed to see that the entire article, there was no mention whatsoever of what his crime is, just trying to infantilise him as someone who had no idea what they were doing and should be let go. Obviously the sentence doesn't fit the crime but that's the problem with committing big crimes in other countries, especially China

In China the sentence DOES fit the crime. This is the problem in the world; we have too many countries trying to lecture and dictate to other countries on how to run their affairs.

RMD

me_right_one wrote: »

The line should be drawn thus: If you deal in drugs, you DO deserve to die. If you smuggle drugs, you DO deserve to die. If you are a peadofile, you DO deserve to die. If you use drugs, you deserve LIFE in prison. If you are a sex offender of adults, you deserve LIFE in prison. If you are a murderer, you deserve LIFE in prison. If you have three convictions, you deserve LIFE in prison.

For anything else, it would depend. Stealing, drink-driving, fighting, fraud etc. all deserve a conviction. First one, 1 year in prison. Second, 3 years. Third, 5 years. Fourth, the rest of your natural life. Saying that, you could do something that would warrant a 20 year spell behind bars on your first conviction. I would add a few new crimes too, such as ripping off a country. Mental assesments AND IQ tests would be mandatory for everybody every year, just like an NCT. That would sort that arguement out.

I do feel sorry for the fella though. The chinese are not known for their fairness. I believe he was away with the fairies.

Sorry pal, but that is one of the most idiotic legal systems and madatory IQ tests? You realise the IQ test is a terrible form of demonstrating "intelligence"?

hooradiation

me_right_one wrote: »

The line should be drawn thus: If you deal in drugs, you DO deserve to die. If you smuggle drugs, you DO deserve to die. If you are a peadofile, you DO deserve to die. If you use drugs, you deserve LIFE in prison. If you are a sex offender of adults, you deserve LIFE in prison. If you are a murderer, you deserve LIFE in prison. If you have three convictions, you deserve LIFE in prison.

For anything else, it would depend. Stealing, drink-driving, fighting, fraud etc. all deserve a conviction. First one, 1 year in prison. Second, 3 years. Third, 5 years. Fourth, the rest of your natural life. Saying that, you could do something that would warrant a 20 year spell behind bars on your first conviction. I would add a few new crimes too, such as ripping off a country. Mental assesments AND IQ tests would be mandatory for everybody every year, just like an NCT. That would sort that arguement out.

These are all the worst ideas. Ever.

"Ripping off a country" what populist fucking nonsense

Stercus Accidit

Seaneh wrote: »

He is not autistic, he has Aspergers, a massively different condition and no excuse for doing something so ****ing stupid.

[/edit]
Not massively different, but not the same either, it's like comparing a flesh wound to having a hole in your chest/
[/edit]

Aspergers is on the Autistic spectrum.

Besides, that is an actual condition, this latest Akmal Shaikh has no medical history for his 'disorder'.

Do you think hacking for ufo's is worse than drug smuggling? I know at least one of those things ruins lives, the other is pure fantasy land stuff.

Regardless, the british government cant complain if they themselves extradite their own citizens with diagnosed mental disorders to countries that use torture.

ClayDavis

me_right_one wrote: »

Well if Iwas wrongly accused of a crime and couldnt afford a solicitor, I'd be BURNING through all the law books and information I could before the court. And if I was blind, I'd do it through Braille:rolleyes:

Haha! Brilliant! I do believe the old phrase is "A man who defends himself before a court has a fool for a client." You seem pretty set in your opinion, I just hope that you end up in this situation some day so you learn the error of your ways. If you manage to learn court procedure, rules of evidence, and then the caselaw and legislation describing the actual offence while being held before trial then I will take my hat off to you.

me_right_one wrote:

And if someone genuinely cant afford a barrister, DIY. Barristers are only people too, they had to learn from scratch, and everyone in the country did the leaving cert! The law is written down for all citizens to see

Firstly, yes barristers do start from scratch. Then they usually spend at least three years doing a law degree (or a different degree then a conversion course), plus a year at Kings Inn and then a year deviling. That's about 5 years of fairly tough work with the benefit of experienced lecturers, tutors and legal professionals to learn from along the way.It's a bit different to reading a manual.
Back O/T, It's pretty obvious from what I've read that the guy definitely had some mental problems. There have been numerous reports from people who knew Akmal when he was homeless in Poland of his mental state. I'm not going to say the guy didn't do anything wrong but China's legal system has a poor history of fairness and balance. You put these two together and drug mule or not, it's a very harsh sentence.

yaaaboy

I THINK...if everybody that got caught smuggling drugs was killed (mental illness or not) there would be nobody left to smuggle them

Fair play to china for standing up to their morals.

truecrippler

yaaaboy wrote: »

I THINK...if everybody that got caught smuggling drugs was killed (mental illness or not) there would be nobody left to smuggle them

Fair play to china for standing up to their morals.

But what about the people that didn't get caught?:rolleyes:

Chucky the tree

yaaaboy wrote: »

I THINK...if everybody that got caught smuggling drugs was killed (mental illness or not) there would be nobody left to smuggle them

Fair play to china for standing up to their morals.

Like how there is no murders in countries that has the death penalty yea? Well done yaaaboy, you'll go far.

OutlawPete

me_right_one wrote: »

if I was blind, I'd do it through Braille:rolleyes:

And if you were dumb?

therewillbe

They have their laws so they should be respected.All Drug dealers I believe should have the same fate . It is a shame it aint in this country .The Brits are quick in condemming them over this issue , Were are they in relation to a whole bunch of other issues within China.It suits them to keep their mouth shut when trade etc are on the line.

hitlersson666

El Weirdo wrote: »

What an excellent addition to the thread.

Maybe they should bring back capital punishment for bad grammar/spelling too.:rolleyes:

BTW, if you'd bothered to read the whole thread, you'd see that the video was posted in the first couple of pages.

sorry about that but it does show how mental he is was

hitlersson666

ClayDavis wrote: »

Haha! Brilliant! I do believe the old phrase is "A man who defends himself before a court has a fool for a client." You seem pretty set in your opinion, I just hope that you end up in this situation some day so you learn the error of your ways. If you manage to learn court procedure, rules of evidence, and then the caselaw and legislation describing the actual offence while being held before trial then I will take my hat off to you.Firstly, yes barristers do start from scratch. Then they usually spend at least three years doing a law degree (or a different degree then a conversion course), plus a year at Kings Inn and then a year deviling. That's about 5 years of fairly tough work with the benefit of experienced lecturers, tutors and legal professionals to learn from along the way.It's a bit different to reading a manual.
Back O/T, It's pretty obvious from what I've read that the guy definitely had some mental problems. There have been numerous reports from people who knew Akmal when he was homeless in Poland of his mental state. I'm not going to say the guy didn't do anything wrong but China's legal system has a poor history of fairness and balance. You put these two together and drug mule or not, it's a very harsh sentence.

lol this guy was too busy trying to get world peace duh!!!!!

Evolute

I tottally agree with all the people who say he got what was coming.
He smuggled heroin into a country who only recently put out a study saying that most of their youth crime was related to violent video games(before you ask for a link I will find it in a minute)http://www.pcworld.com/article/185490/china_blames_online_games_for_drugs_murder_teen_pregnancy.html.

Yeh its sad if he did actually have Bi-polar disorder then fair enough but they didn't have a shred of evidence to that matter china even said if there was any physical evidence as in some kind of medical assessment to prove the matter they would have had him mentally assessed but they didn't as far as china where concerned he smuggled drugs kill him as it is their law.

If he was tricked which there is no evidence to either he still should have checked his suitcase seening as he obviously didnt pack it himself.
It was a harsh sentence but china is a harsh country and honestly I think it is a matter of principle that they didnt fold to international pressure.

Sheeps

Apparently one of the symptoms of bi-polar is smuggling heroin.

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.