To some degree, you can make this argument about every crime/criminal. Really, a failure of logic, ethics, and morals is mental instability by way of "insufficiently developed executive function". In Texas, if you are bipolar and murder someone, you are probably going to get the death penalty. Heck, we even execute paranoid schizophrenics in Texas. In fact, if you look at the schizophrenics that Texas has executed, many of them had successful used the insanity defense previously to get off the hook for violent crimes before the murder that resulted in them being executed.
Remember that American bipolar passenger who was shot dead by US air marshal FROM BEHIND while running AWAY FROM THE PLANE? There was not even 30 seconds of questioning.
If it was true. Do you think a person who would do anything to become a popstar is unique in some form? A person who thinks theyre great at singing and makes youtube videos? A person who believes some multimillionaire's promise in exchange for doing some dirty work? These are all normal things. Again, death penalty is harsh, but this guy is/was not any more insane than william hung for example.
Why are you assuming an appropriate process could not take 30 minutes? Especially if this bipolar thing was brought up and checked out beforehand?
From the original article: [rquoter]Shaikh's family and the British government had appealed for clemency, arguing the former businessman suffers from bipolar disorder. [/rquoter] William Hung would probably not agree to become a drug dealer to become a pop star nor go and live on the streets of Poland out of a belief that that would lead to becoming a pop star.
Didn't happen. But apparently they have the "right" to fine us or lock us up anywhere from hours to a life time. Slippery slopes. Seriously? So all those aspiring artists living the Bohemian lifestyle, many of which are equally talentless, obviously all have mental illness. Bonzi Wells played in China after no longer able to do it in the NBA, also has mental illness? Which countries do you have to visit to actually be a drug smuggler? Columbia? A far more plausible alternate explanation is, he went to Poland, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan to smuggle drugs. Another more plausible explanation is he actually was an aspiring (though sh1tty) artist who turned to a life of crime after not being able to cut it in the music industry. If you really care about the Chinese side of the story: http://news.xinhuanet.com/legal/2009-12/29/content_12721404.htm "According to relevant Chinese laws, the request for verification of mental illness of the accused is not unconditional. The requester must state proof of mental illness of the accused. The court may determine whether additional verification is needed based on that evidence. The British side did not provide sufficient proof of Shaikh nor his family ever suffered from mental illness. Shaikh himself also did not provide related material. In the opinion of the court, there is no reason to suspect the mental state of Shaikh in this case and the request for verification for mental illness does not meet the prerequisite condition to be accepted." They carried out due process just fine.
The BBC article had this part towards the very end Therein lies the problem, I think. Many people in the West are still struggling mightily with this trend of countries enjoying 21st century economic prosperity while maintaining a political and judicial system more reminiscent of the medieval age. China is a leading example of this phenomena, but many other Asian states also enjoy this strange and deeply concerning mix of a modernized economy and draconian laws. The western world has long bought into and actively promoted the theory of economic development as a catalyst for ushering in a system of government which emphasizes human rights and other international norms and thereby creating a more 'civil' and modern state, yet they are now realizing that the Asian model is defying those expectations, and there is really little anyone can do about it. The 21st century will primarily be defined by uneasy alliances and a reshuffling of priorities, where the promotion of liberal ideals and way of life will take a backseat to trade and economic prosperity. This is a natural shift given the fact that the global agenda will be increasingly influenced by the second world of non-aligned, non-ideological states whose only interest is to do business and placate their growing and increasingly young populations who are looking for jobs.
Ok, if that typical-execution didn't happen - then what did happen? They killed a ****ing mentally imbalanced guy after a half-hour trial. You're the one making the slippery slope argument here. I'd argue that states enjoy the use of imprisonment far too often, and often without justification, but jailing some average person after due process for selling drugs and blowing the brains out of a mentally-imbalanced nutjob after a half-hour trial are two very different things ... wouldn't you agree? No one here, and DEFINITELY not me, is saying that the U.S. punishment system is good compared to China's system (so put your petty-ass nationalism back in the closet) ... but, you seriously can't see how executing a talentless guy, who thought he was gonna be an international pop star after years living on the streets in Poland, (with the song "Come Little Rabbit" no less) is a prime example of unjustifiable state-sanctioned murder? Before you answer ... I'm not some dumb **** nationalist that thinks this country is guiltless - lord knows I critique it enough - so don't come at me like that. If you want to be an idiot nationalist, then that's your business - but in that case, there's nothing here to argue because you're just another "my country, right or wrong" dumb**** (even though you're probably living here and enjoying it quite a bit).
"Westerners have a long and disreputable history of seeking exemption from Chinese law for their nationals engaged in drug dealing, going back to the Opium Wars of the 19th century," said Christopher Stone, chairman of the Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. "The Chinese cannot treat this convicted drug smuggler differently from others because he is a British citizen." Oh - I heard Brit prostitutes now boycott patrons of a Chinese origin to express their anguish. What a powerful fight back! :grin:
If you've spent anytime around homeless people you will find that many of them are suffering from mental illness. I think it is huge stretch to compare this guy situation to Bonzi Wells. This isn't a former NBA player playing in China this is a guy living on the street in a foreign country thinking he can write a song that will save the World. From what information we know so far it doesn't sound like the guy in his right mind. Evidence for that? I have no doubt that this sentence was carried out according to the PRC due process but given that the PRC executes more people than the rest of World combined I have some doubts about the standards of their due proces. Also before you bring up Texas and the US record of executions I will state that I oppose the death penalty here too and think it is a travesty that the US executes mentally ill people.
I know quite abit about the Opium Wars as ancestors of mine suffered from them but it strikes me as petty to somehow justify this situation based on the Opium Wars. Just to add I would never advocate the British get special breaks because they are British but am talking more about the quality of compassion. Sadly I suspect that the PRC executes many many more Chinese who are likely as mentally deficient or more than this person. Its sad that it takes a foreigner to be executed to make this an issue.
Just read some ignorant posts to this thread - to clarify (and inquiring minds may do your own research), the guy was sentenced to death 2 years ago by trial court, and this time is the f**king National Supreme Court confirmed it, in 30 minutes. Those who complain about short shrift treatment - guess what would happen had it been decided in the States? The case might not get into the Supreme Court at all!
The word probably in your post embodies everything I said in my post. Also, arguing is fine. They have to make a case. But arguing doesn't mean it's true. Why the hell should clemency be granted unless there's solid proof of bipolar disorder? Solid proof meaning a renowned expert comes in and guarantees that this guy has bipolar disorder. This didn't happen. So the argument was thrown out.
Meh. This is no worse than Singapore's stance on drugs. http://www.thestandard.com.hk/stdn/std/World/GE16Wd06.html
