Controversial verdict has damaged society

    Updated: 2011-09-07 07:52

    By Liu Shinan (China Daily)

      Comments() Print Mail Large Medium  Small 分享按鈕 0

    Controversial verdict has damaged society

    The fall of another senior citizen and his death have thrust the notorious judgment in the Nanjing Peng Yu case into question once again.

    An 88-year-old man slipped and fell at the entrance to a vegetable market about 100 meters from his home and remained lying on the ground, face down, until an ambulance arrived one and half hours later. The man died "because of a respiratory tract clogged by a nosebleed".

    Should anybody have turned him over or on his side, he might have survived. But none of the passers-by in the Zhiyin neighborhood in Wuhan, Hubei province offered a helping hand during those 90 minutes.

    They should be condemned for their cold-heartedness or cowardice. But most people who learned about the tragedy from the media seem to think otherwise. For 12 hours, from 4:22 am on Sunday, when the news was first reported on the Internet, 29,892 users of Sina.com wrote comments on the incident. Almost all of them said they understood why the onlookers did not move to help the man and many admitted that they would have done the same if they were there.

    Everybody in China knows why. It is the result of the many cases in the past when the helper has been accused by the beneficiary, or the beneficiary's family, of being responsible for the accident. Search the reports of such cases online and you will find there have been dozens over the past few years. But of these, the Peng Yu case is the most influential.

    In 2006, Peng Yu, a young resident of Nanjing, capital of Jiangsu province, helped an old woman who had fallen. She later accused him of causing her fall. The court decided in favor of the plaintiff, based on the reasoning that Peng would not have helped the woman up "if he had not had caused the fall". The verdict angered the public, who compared the judge to well-known "muddle-headed judges" in ancient China. Though the case was later settled in an agreement, Peng still paid 10 percent of the costs and it has been mentioned thereafter whenever a similar incident has occurred.

    On Aug 26 this year, in Rugao, Jiangsu province, a bus driver saw an old woman lying on the ground near her overturned tricycle. He stopped his vehicle and went to her aid. The 81-year-old woman later told the police that his bus had hit her tricycle. Fortunately the bus was equipped with a video camera. The police checked the video recording and found that the woman was lying.

    After reading the news, I went to the Zhongguancun electronics market in Beijing and bought a camera for my car on Saturday. The stall owner told me that after the Rugao event was reported in media, the product were selling like hot cakes. "In the past, I sold only several sets a day; now I can sell several dozens a day."

    In fact, everybody knows that the incidents of the helped framing the helper account for only a small percentage of such good deeds. But people still shy away from aiding others because they are afraid of the possible outcome. Most netizens who commented on the Wuhan incident said they would have the impulse to help the fallen man if they were there but would not act, "because I dare not".

    People take such an attitude for two reasons: first, they fear they will fall into the hands of a "muddle-headed judge" like the one in the Peng Yu case should they also be framed by the person they help. Second, those who frame their helpers are never punished.

    The Peng Yu case is so influential it needs to be seriously reviewed. The Supreme People's Court should look into the case again and give the public an explanation on whether the Nanjing court was right basing its judgment on such dubious reasoning. The case is no longer an ordinary one. It has greatly affected our social ethics. The supreme authorities must give due importance to it.

    Wrong court decisions have to be corrected and incompetent judges must be disqualified.

    And ungrateful citizens who accuse their saviors must be punished with civil and even criminal liabilities once they are proven to have lied. Apart from causing others mental distress that invites indemnities, they have committed at least two crimes: first, obstruction of justice; second, extortion.

    If our judicial apparatus cannot protect justice, our society will be irredeemably damaged.

    The author is assistant editor-in-chief of China Daily. E-mail: liushinan@chinadaily.com.cn

    (China Daily 09/07/2011 page10)

    在线精品无码字幕无码AV| 最近2019中文免费字幕在线观看| 少妇无码?V无码专区在线观看| 亚洲中文字幕伊人久久无码| 亚洲AⅤ无码一区二区三区在线 | 国产拍拍拍无码视频免费| 一本久中文视频播放| 免费无码国产在线观国内自拍中文字幕| 国精品无码一区二区三区在线蜜臀| 亚洲日本va中文字幕久久| 免费a级毛片无码免费视频120软件| 亚洲av无码片在线播放| 日本一区二区三区中文字幕| 中文字幕无码一区二区三区本日| 92午夜少妇极品福利无码电影| 亚洲AV无码乱码在线观看裸奔| 久久久久亚洲AV无码专区首JN| 中文精品一卡2卡3卡4卡| 中文字幕丰满乱孑伦无码专区| 高清无码在线视频| 在线看无码的免费网站| 色综合AV综合无码综合网站| 亚洲日韩乱码中文无码蜜桃臀网站| 狠狠精品久久久无码中文字幕 | 午夜精品久久久久久久无码| 67194成l人在线观看线路无码| 久久精品国产亚洲AV无码偷窥| 亚洲AV无码国产在丝袜线观看| 国产成人精品一区二区三区无码| 亚洲欧美日韩中文字幕二区| 狠狠综合久久综合中文88| 久久精品?ⅴ无码中文字幕| 亚洲国产午夜中文字幕精品黄网站| 最好看最新的中文字幕免费| 天堂在线中文字幕| 亚洲日韩在线中文字幕综合| 中文字幕一区日韩在线视频| 久久亚洲AV成人无码| 亚洲av无码一区二区三区四区| 无码日韩精品一区二区免费| 人妻无码αv中文字幕久久|