Baarmoeder Sina netizen 2008-01-19 21:56:49 says to me: article sixty-third of the criminal law expressly provides that: "the criminals with the provisions of this Law of mitigating circumstances, shall be sentenced to a punishment below the legally prescribed punishment. Although do not have the crime prescribed in this Law for mitigating circumstances, but according to the special circumstances of the case, with the approval of the Supreme People's court, also may be sentenced to a punishment below the legally prescribed punishment". Xu Ting acts constitute the crime of theft......

To this, my answer is:

Legal experts anonymous: saw you yesterday suggested that I study criminal law, I didn't dare to promise, because the content of criminal law is too much. The first is called the "PRC Criminal Law" criminal law, followed by the criminal law provisions in other laws of dispersion, is once again the textbooks and monographs, thesis copious science of criminal law. Later, you suggested that I study the criminal law sixty-third, I didn't dare to promise, I found 63, but at that time I thought I found the wrong version, so will you please 63 released, we discuss together.

First, Xu Ting's act of theft? Why? This is the focus of debate. Online public opinion is so strong, because it is a trial judge and not to find a legal basis of Xu Ting theft conviction. If you find a legal basis, I believe that the Internet will quell objections, no matter whether his sentence fair.

The question now is not whether the appropriate sentencing range, but the charges are accurate, whether there is a legal basis. Not looking for less than the legal basis to own understanding to give a free life to conviction, arbitrary deprivation of liberty of a person, especially the "life imprisonment" such severe punishment.

Second, you cited sixty-third, did not prove your point of view. 63 that is, can use cannot determine sentencing criteria determining accusation when.

In addition, the net friend suggestions:

1. anonymous online Sina netizen many, I do not know which one is you, can you speak in plus a symbol or name, for the purpose of identification.

2 you said I did not answer your question, you re listed, answer me.

3 you asked me about a case of Xu Ting independent problems, I deliberately did not answer. You may want to consider my level of theory of criminal law, but I can't and system through legal training than people, so I will discuss with you the content and the Xu Ting case. If you really do not understand the problem, you can ask your teacher, also can send an e-mail to my mailbox, I alone with you. If you pass the law training system of people, with the law, or by what principle, justice, justice to convince me, I do believe that law education now is successful.

4 your last sentence: "in view of this, we apply the judge according to article sixty-third of the criminal law, the penalty is life imprisonment to Xu Ting following made the right decision". I wonder if you have not thought about it what's wrong?

Attached: anonymous Sina netizen to my words

 Baarmoeder Sina netizen 2008-01-19 21:56:49 on my message:

Dragon fly:

Article sixty-third of the criminal law expressly provides that: "the criminals with the provisions of this Law of mitigating circumstances, shall be sentenced to a punishment below the legally prescribed punishment. Although do not have the crime prescribed in this Law for mitigating circumstances, but according to the special circumstances of the case, with the approval of the Supreme People's court, also may be sentenced to a punishment below the legally prescribed punishment".

Xu Ting acts constitute the crime of theft, and according to the current law belongs to "theft of financial institutions, especially huge amount, shall be sentenced to life imprisonment or death, also be sentenced to confiscation of property". The court of First Instance judgement of Xu Ting imprisonment, single from the application of the law say not illegal, but whether it is worth discussing.

1 Xu Ting's subjective malignant is relatively small. The ATM for financial institutions to the meaning of the criminal law, is a new product of the economic social development, its dominant feature is reflected in an office counter of the bank, is a platform of financial capital and the user conversion, also is the law a boundary line of capital special protection and general protection, have the difference between this and a guarded state coffers, armored cars, at least in Xu Ting including the popular feeling of speaking, "subjective mental state to steal grain treasury" is very light, even still in the subconscious state, but a stronger mental state is the general significance of implementing a steal on greed. Xu Ting, no record, no record, usually performance is good, although not the essence of this case study, but to judge subjective mentality of Xu Ting in cash has significance for reference, in fact, Xu found in ATM vulnerability, will this news also no record, no record, usually the performance also a friend, the good state, more clearly reflects the lack of Xu Ting the seriousness of his behavior, his behavior is sporadic, should be considered in sentencing plot.

The 2 objective, bank losses reasonably compensate, Xu Ting Lam also has actively expressed willingness to refund, now all damages because of his behavior caused by. In this case, cause the teller machine very special fault formed as cases, although should not bear the corresponding obligations in the criminal law, but it should be a sufficient reason to Xu Ting reduce criminal responsibility. From the human perspective, a fresh thing, the emergence of a new state of rare, with great interest by a weak ordinary young people will judge ability of things to use their card to withdraw money flat and realizing their own greed, whether this should itself when get very concerned about it in sentencing. 3 with the austerity of criminal law in essence, the function of criminal law is the regulation of social relations and coordination of the biggest to punish the minimum cost of acquisition. We respect the existing criminal law and relevant judicial interpretation, but the economic and social development leads to the amount standard lag, as well as crimes financial capital with the weakening of the guarded extended by banks in some cases caused by the loss of objective phenomenon, if all passed on to Xu Ting, seems to have violated the criminal law too, regulation and control of the the social relations will also appear inappropriate state.

In view of this, we apply the judge according to article sixty-third of the criminal law, the penalty is life imprisonment to Xu Ting following made the right decision.