Today, a social news triggered a wave of public opinion, which is very lively on Weibo hot searches.
Here's how it happened: On August 27, in Kunshan, Jiangsu, a BMW car wanted to grab a bicycle lane and pressed a white line to force an electric car (battery car) that was riding normally to stop. The two sides had a quarrel. There was no serious dispute. The BMW owner took out a long knife from the car and the nature of the change occurred. He took the knife and slashed at the electric car owner. Unexpectedly, the knife fell to the ground during the time, and the electric car owner picked it up and turned it around. Cut off to the BMW owner and initiate a chase.
On the evening of the 28th, the local public security issued a notice: The two people clashed due to driving problems. The BMW owner Liu XX died due to ineffective rescue operations. The electric car owner was injured but not life-threatening.
It was the BMW owner who took the knife, but was eventually killed by the electric car owner. The harshness and drama of this case aroused the strong interest of the people eating melons.
The most critical question is how to characterize it. Does the owner of an electric car intentionally kill, cause death through negligence, or justify defense?
Netizens have great abilities and quickly picked out the background and past of the BMW man-he is a male classmate with a very good story.
He has tattoos on his arms and tattoos all over his chest. He is suspected of being a member of the "Tianan Society". Many small videos show that he usually likes to dance fist and kick his legs and gather crowds for fun. Moreover, the 36-year-old has a lot of convictions. In July 2001, he was sentenced to 4 and a half years imprisonment by Beijing Dongcheng District People’s Court for theft; on September 7, 2006, he was sentenced to administrative detention by Kunshan Public Security Bureau of Jiangsu Province for 5 days for fighting; March 2007, He was sentenced to 9 months imprisonment by the People’s Court of Kunshan City, Jiangsu Province for racketeering; on May 11, 2009, he was sentenced to 3 years in prison for the crime of deliberately destroying property; on May 13, 2014, he was sentenced to the crime of provoking trouble , Intentional injury was sentenced to 2 years and 2 months.
But such a person has actually obtained a certificate of righteousness... It is reported that he once reported clues about drug trafficking, and the police arrested drug dealers on this basis, but did not clearly stipulate that criminals cannot declare righteousness.
Article 20 of the "Criminal Law" has provisions on proper defense, which is translated into the vernacular that if someone is assaulting you, you can take measures to stop the other party without assuming criminal responsibility; however, the measures taken cannot exceed the necessary limits. Otherwise, it is too defensive and you still have to bear part of the responsibility; and, if the other party’s act of infringing upon you is a violent crime that seriously endangers your personal safety, such as assault, murder, robbery, rape, kidnapping, etc., then you can rest assured and boldly fight back. Protected by law.
Because BMW men are stigmatized, which can influence the public's perception of this matter, emotional scales are naturally prone to "unlucky" electric car men.
Some people yelled "elimination of harm for the people", some joked that "I killed myself with a knife, which is considered suicide". There are also people who lament, "When your life is threatened, if you don't let others down, others will let you down."
Some law school lecturers believe that this case is in line with legitimate defense and should not be convicted, and some lawyers said it was suspected of intentional injury to death, and criminal law experts said that it depends on whether the fatal injury is the first 5 knives or the last 2 knives...Professionals are still inconsistent, ordinary people Even more talkative.
A scholar said it well, "Being scolded is the eternal destiny of the judiciary and even the law. Because it exists to settle disputes between two parties with strong conflicts of interest, and this neutrality and judgment is hard not to be rejected by at least one of them. Long-term criticism."
Internet boiling anti-profit days are also useless, the core conclusion needs to be clarified by the judicial department.
Let’s take a look at an old movie first, the famous director Roman Polanski’s "Immoral Trial", starring Sigourney Weaver (Dr. Grace in "Avatar"), Ben King Slee (won the Oscar actor with "The Biography of Gandhi").
The English title of the film "Death and the Maiden" should be literally translated as "Death and the Maiden", but the Chinese translation of the title directly points out the essence of the film's theme, which is a torture of law and morality.
The heroine played by Sigourney in the film was once blindfolded by a doctor and raped many times during her teenage years. "He tied me to the table, charged me with an electric shock, beat me with a whip, and Cigarette butts burned my chest, and even inserted a metal rod into my lower body. I thought yelling would relieve the pain, who knows there would be no result..." This thing left a deep shadow on her and made her nervous.
Many years later, the heroine has been married. On a thunderstorm night, a neighbor played by Kingsley came to visit. Relying only on the memory of the sound, and a tape of Schubert's "Death and Virgin" symphony in the neighbor's car-the doctor would listen to this song every time he raped her. The hostess judged that this neighbor was the murderer who violated her back then, so she went crazy and tied the neighbor to the room to try the criminal with her husband.
However, the neighbor has evidence of alibi, which makes it difficult for the husband to believe the heroine's determination. Because the evidence in the court is not enough, the law cannot protect her or comfort her. The hostess can only lynch in her own home, abuse her neighbors, and force him to confess the crime she committed.
This is indeed an immoral trial and does not conform to procedural justice.
But imagine that the main woman calls the police according to the law and sends her neighbors to court. Can she get revenge? The whole film is based on the premise of legal inaction-the heroine was humiliated in the past and was also arrested by the secret police for participating in the student movement. In the final analysis, she was harmed by the law, so the heroine's revenge The audience felt happy and enmity in their hearts.
Until the end of the film, it did not clearly tell the audience whether this neighbor was the doctor who perpetrated the violence. This torture and lynching has therefore become a test of the conscience of the audience, listing various complicated options for the audience, but no one is absolutely impartial and satisfactory to everyone.
The reason why this "anti-homicide case" reminds me of this "Immoral Trial" is because we people are anxious. I heard that too many cases have been said. The sensational case of Shandong’s mother humiliation, Yu Huan, was sentenced to 5 years in prison for defense. "The owner and the thief stabbed to death and his accomplice was sentenced to 5 years for defense." "The demolitionist was sentenced to 3 years in prison for overdefending the robber when he saw righteousness", "The demolitionist was sentenced to excessive defense for smashing the house at night, and the demolished person was sentenced to excessive defense." Years"...We don't know how to protect ourselves anymore. In the face of being violated, how can we still have time to grasp the scale of defense?
History books tell us that non-violence does not cooperate, while reality tells us that only violence can be used to get out.
We don't know how the electric car man was stimulated at the time, and we don't understand his psychological dilemma at the time, so we can't judge whether his counterattack is "forced to Liangshan" or "passionate murder."
Sometimes we don’t believe that the law can protect the people, and even hurt those involved. We have no other choice but to fight back.
Many hot social cases have to rely on the intervention of public opinion to get the attention of the whole society and to further convey public opinion to the upper structure. On the one hand, the scale of the trial should not be swayed by public opinion, but on the one hand, it is indeed necessary to consider the impact of the case on the construction of the rule of law and public order and good customs, otherwise justice will become a paradox.
If you want to go out to the sky, you should keep a low profile. I advise you to be kind.
View more about Death and the Maiden reviews
