|
|
—
本帖被 台山同学网 从 畅所欲言 移动到本区(2016-03-18)
—
Why the guilty verdict of Peter Liang is unjust and unfair?
为什么梁彼的判决是不公正不公平的？ 请大家为梁签一签求减刑请愿信。https://www.change.org/p/danny-chun-call-for-leniency-in-peter-liang-s-sentencing
1. Actually, Laudau - Peter Liang`s partner, has testified in the court that they didn`t receive enough CPR training in their team including Peter! However, the court refused to cancel the charging of "failed to apply CPR". 梁的搭档LAUDAU已经在法庭上说了他们没有接受足够的CPR培训，包括梁。但是法庭拒绝撤销这项起诉。
They didn't perform CPR because they didn't know how.They have bot received sufficient training of CPR.
《Peter Liang's NYPD CPR Instructor Stripped of Badge and Gun, Reports Say》 - 他们根本没有学怎么做CPR. 他们没有得到足够的培训。
Legal medical expert has testified that it was inappropriate to apply CPR for the the victim based on his actual shooting position in body.
法医已经说了，受害者当时的伤情并不适合立刻施行CPR.
《Death of Eric Garner》 - （from wikipedia)
The officers and EMTs did not perform CPR on Garner at the scene; according to a spokesman for the PBA, this was because they believed that Garner was breathing and that it would be improper to perform CPR on someone who was still breathing.
在2014. Eric Garner的事件中，白人警官Daniel Pantaleo在等待急救车的时候，也并没有实施CPR. 最后是无罪释放。
2. Laudau has testified Peter Liang did call the ambulance when they realized there was somebody shot. And there is a record for the calling.
Laudau证明梁在事发后有打了救护车，而且有电话录音。
Laudau testified that they spent about 2 minutes in discussing how to report in 7 to 8th floor, before the trail, but he changed his testifying to 4 minutes in the court.
Laudau, 改了口供说他们花了四分钟讨论汇报，实际上一开始他是说只花了2分钟，让人觉得Laudau背后的动机和诚信很有问题，（按道理，Laudau也应该被起诉，有人怀疑他是用改口供来换取免于被起诉的好处）。
Liang testified he was stock by the scene of Akai laying down on blood. He was unable to function. And he did tried to call the ambulance and he went to ask other resident the exact address of the case.
梁为了搞清楚事发地点去向邻居问了几次地址，最后才成功打了救护车。然而法庭还是质疑他花费的时间过长-4分钟？5分钟？梁说他当时是惊呆了。
If Liang was unbale to call, how about the partner Laudau? Can`t he call for an ambulance in 15 seconds?
假设梁是惊呆了，至少是没马上打救护车了，那么LAudau 怎么又不能15秒钟内打救护车呢？
What did not come out in court was that Police Officer Liang knelt down and cried next to Akai Gurley when he realized Akai was dead.--------By: Don B. Lee - Statement on the Tragic Death of Mr. Akai Gurley
法庭上还没呈堂的是，梁跪在akai身边包头疼哭，当他意识到akai已经死了的时候。
3. The media has distorted the fact for many times in the past one year. One of them is that they claims Liang texted the union when he found somebody was shot. The fact is that Peter Liang did not text to the union! The Media has successfully painted Peter to be a cold-blooded or coward.
媒体在案件审讯的一年过程中，放出很多小道消息，例如说他在事发后没试试CPR救助，反而发短信去工会，事实上，这纯属污蔑, 梁根本没发短信去工会。媒体这样公然对一个被起诉人进行抹黑，是极其不负责的。也会影响大众对案子本身的认识，从而影响审讯结果。这是极其荒唐的。
（放出这些小道消息的人，应该被追究法律责任。）
They cliams Liang told his partner that he would be fired by his superiors. But Liang testified that he said " I fired" instead of " I am fired".
梁没说“我被开除了 我被炒了” 他说“我开枪了”。
They discuss how to report to the their superior when they was in 8th floor before they realized somebody was shot in 5th floor. However, the media claims they let the victim lying down aside and focus on how to report, making people think Liang is a cold-blooded.
他们在讨论如何汇报的时候根本不知道射中了人，媒体经常扭曲这段事实，说他们让受害者倒地一旁，只顾谈论如何汇报，担心被革职。让人觉得梁就是一个冷血鬼。
4. They tend to ignore the physical and psychological factors of the environment - the darkness； the narrowed stairs； the criminal records of the building and the district； the time of the case occurred - 11 O`clock at night, the physical and psychological features of normal people at night (mid night?) ；the sudden startling of the large noise ; the experience of these two rookie cops；the whole behavior of Landau during that night and in the whole case.
大众，包括法庭，趋向于忽视了很多具体的事实 - 那栋楼已经几天没有电了- narrowed staris (拼音打不出来） - 那栋楼的治安记录 哪个区的治安记录 - 事发的钟点 晚上11点 正常人已经休息 人对刺激也会更加敏感 - 人体被惊吓的瞬间反应 - 两个新手警察的经验 - Laudau在整个事发经过的表现。
Key context was not allowed to enter the trial (two cops were shot doing vertical patrols during the week the jury was deliberating).
两天前，发生了与案发地环境极其相似的另一栋政府援助楼里面的枪击事，同样是两名菜鸟警察晚间巡逻，不同的是这两名警察遇到一个人与朋友在走廊喝酒，希望他提供身份证，他说请警察跟他回屋去拿，然后回屋拿出枪企图杀警，一名警察被击中面颊，一名被击中腹部，虽然伤不致命。法官（一个韩国人）不准在庭上引用。
The dangerous factors in patrolling a Bronx housing project stairwell.
《NYPD Officers Shot on Patrol: It's a 'Miracle' We Survived》
巡逻中的危险因素，两位幸运的生还警员。
5. They should not let the jurors who have not been trained in shooting to judge if Liang`s gun has the possibility to get discharged. When it could be easy for a cop, it would be difficult for normal people.
他们不应该让陪审团来判断梁的枪支是否具备走火的可能，因为他们陪审团没有经过长期的专业用枪培训，而且年纪也不一样，每个人手掌的肌肌肉结构都不一样。
Since when does putting a gun in a jurors hands make them an expert on firearms? If you're going to take that route to sway the verdict, let's be fair and put the jurors alone in a dark and dangerous NYCHA housing project staircase at 11 pm and see how they rule then.
现场环境不一样，危险因素不一样，陪审团在法庭上的体验和当晚的体验完全不一样。因此不能由他们定夺。
6. The action of holding a gun on left hand and a flashlight on right hand and approaching the door is not a reckless action, at least, IT IS NOT the action which has led to the shooting directly. ( Liang is a left-handed.) Some people say during Vertical Patrol, it was officially - gun in one hand & flashlight in the other.
一手拿枪一手拿手电筒靠近门，并不是什么鲁莽行为，至少，这并不是促成开枪的根本原因。 谁会认同一个正常人 一手拿枪一手开门就可以直接导致枪支走火呢？ 梁当时是用左手拿着枪（梁是左撇子），用身体去开门，另一只手拿着手电筒，并不是促成开枪的根本原因。有些人说，在做垂直巡逻的时候就是需要一手拿电筒一手拿枪。
What the picture telling us is more like a lack of assistance from partner.
这个画面还能说明的东西是：他没得到搭档的足够援助和配合。
7. The direct factor which led to shoot is the sudden large noise occurred when Peter Liang opened the door, instead of the so-callled reckless action of using body to open door with a gun. The sudden large noise startled him.
直接导致子弹跑出来的因素是 - 一声巨响，一声发生在开门哪个瞬间动作的巨响，一声可能来自黑暗的门后的巨响，和当时黑暗的情况下警察下意思的自卫。 当时梁的脑海和大部分人在这样的情形下的感知应该是这样的- 门背后可能马上迎面而来一群歹徒了，马上警匪大战了。从而触发了瞬间的自卫模式。
也许自己也以为是走火，其实是下意识的自卫了。
至少，没有证据证明梁在当晚是鲁莽导致了开枪。
（发生在2004年，同样于黑暗巡逻中被惊吓 枪支“走火”置途人死亡的案件是- Shooting of Timothy Stansbury，陪审团同意了被告的证词，认为是意外事件。）
If the noise had appeared 1 second later, would the action of shot have been delayed for 1 second and thus no death ?
The answer is Yes, He might shot all the same just when the noise appeared suddenly which startled him and thus turned on his self-defenses or subconscious self-defense immediately. But one second later, the so called reckless action had pasted.
如果那声巨响推迟1秒发生，子弹会迟1秒打出来吗？答案是肯定的，但是1秒之后那个所谓的鲁莽动作 用胳膊开门已经过去了。
If the noise had never appeared, Would the bullet have come out all the same ?
The answer is No. The answer from most people would be "No".
如果那声巨响没有出现，子弹还会打出来吗？答案是否，大部分人的答案应该都是不会。从当晚的场景来说应该是不会。
So, at least, the so-called reckless action of using his body to open the door with gun in hand did not lead to the shooting directly. That means the logic and the deduction in the trail were invalid. The direct factor is the sudden large noise.
所以, 至少可以说明，法庭上的逻辑和推断都是不成立的。因为从根本上直接导致开枪的至少不是这个所谓鲁莽的动作。而是那一声巨响，和当时的环境。
Actually, according to test from previous defendant lawyer, Liang's gun needs only 11.5 pounds to shoot, while it usually requires at least 12.0 pounds of pressure to shoot for other guns.
事实上，根据前面一些测试，梁的枪只要实施11.5磅的力就可以射出子弹了，而普通正常的枪支是需要12磅。但是同样地，法官不予理喻。
8. Other cops also carry the gun on hand when they do patrolling.? According to some articles, the answer is YES! Same case, please refer to Shooting of Timothy Stansbury.
其他警员在巡逻的时候也手拿枪，这个似乎已经在其他文章中提到，也似乎已经有上庭作证过，然而法庭不予理会！一样的情形，请参考Shooting of Timothy Stansbury 一案。
9. Why Laudau did not open the flashlight for him in the dark stair? They should have assistant each other in every steps of the patrolling.
If Laudau had opened the flashlight for Liang, at least, it would have lessened the level of the nerves and might have changed the result of the tragedy.
为什么LAUDAU就没有为梁打开手电筒呢？ 他们既然在整个巡逻过程中是搭档，为什么他不配合梁的行动呢？ 他有没责任配合呢？
如果LAUDAU给梁开电筒，至少减低减低现场的紧张程度。甚至直接改变整个悲剧的结果。
10. It is unlikely for a normal people to become totally reckless in a night. If Liang were a reckless one, he must have been noticed in his past 18 months` working by his boss.
Since an employee`s working performance must keep an average level under the normal working environment, if the result becomes unusual, the working environment must have been peculiar.
The court should refer to Liang`s past working performance.
一个人不可能一夜之间就变成另一个人，一个平时称职的人，不可能一夜就变成鲁莽鬼。 如果梁平时鲁莽的话，他的上司应该早有察觉，而应该直接开除或者不应该派他去这样的危险地方。
既然，在正常的工作环境下员工的工作表现会持续一个平均的水平，那么，当结果是不正常的时候，那么这个工作环境也必然（极大可能）是不正常的。
法庭应该参考他以往的工作表现。
11. Almost Same Case in 2004 but totally different convicting.- Shooting of Timothy Stansbury.
几乎一样的案情，完全不同的判决。《The shooting of Timothy Stansbury Jr》（from wikipedia）
The shooting of Timothy Stansbury Jr. occurred in New York City on January 24, 2004. Stansbury was an unarmed 19-year-old New York City man who was shot and killed by New York Police Department Officer Richard S. Neri Jr. on January 24, 2004. Officer Neri and a partner were patrolling the rooftop of a housing project in the Bedford-Stuyvesant neighborhood of Brooklyn at about 1 a.m. Officer Neri, with his gun drawn, approached a rooftop door to check the stairway inside. Neri testified to a Brooklyn grand jury that he fired his standard Glock 19 pistol unintentionally when he was startled as Stansbury pushed open the rooftop door. Stansbury, a resident of an adjoining building, died from one shot in the chest. The grand jury found the shooting to be accidental.[1]
Neri和他的搭档一起于2004年一个晚上在布鲁克林纽约的一栋大楼做垂直巡逻，Neri从顶楼拿着枪走进顶楼的门， Neri在死者Stansbury忽然开门的时候被吓了一惊，然后开了枪导致Stansbury死亡。Neri在法庭上像陪审团作证自己是没意图开枪，是因为被Stansbury忽然开门吓到了。大陪审团们判断这位为一起意外事件，Neri无罪释放,至今仍任职纽约警局。
12. Some evidence was misleadingly display in trail.The prosecutor put the clip of "two cops discussing how to report" on the scene when they realized somebody was shot, which can misconduct the jury. They have disorder the timelines.
控诉方在法庭上将他们讨论如何汇报的一幕搬到他们发现有人被射中了哪里。错乱时间线。对陪审团造成误导。The prosecution changed their story during the closing arguments to say that Liang deliberately aimed at Gurley, which has turned over previous testifying in trail Illogically.
控诉方在结案陈词的时候，忽然改口说梁是故意射杀Gurley, 推翻前面所有的证词，其荒唐之程度让人咋舌！
In conclusion, it is not a reckless manslaughter. It is more like a particular self-defense or a subconscious self-defense under a peculiar environment or basically a tragic accident of a cop like case occurred in 2004 of Shooting of Timonthy Stansbury.
总结，这更像一起特殊环境下的自卫模式，或者像2004年纽约警员Neri的案件一样根本就是意外，虽然导致无辜的人死亡，但是，依据法律是不必被定罪的。Please Free Peter Liang.
Please sign for call for leniency for Peter Liang.@ chang.org
[ 此帖被杏仁饼在2016-03-18 22:37重新编辑 ]
|
