一路 BBS

 找回密码
 注册
搜索
查看: 1012|回复: 2
打印 上一主题 下一主题

张浩间谍案:妻子募捐帮丈夫在美国打官司

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 6-8-2015 17:43:41 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
BBC Chinese, June 8, 2015.
www.bbc.co.uk/zhongwen/simp/worl ... _tianjin_uni_spying

Note:
(a) 天津大学被美诱捕教授张浩之妻求助:或需2000万律师费. 观察者网, June 6, 2015.
www.guancha.cn/america/2015_06_06_322394.shtml
(attachments: 天津大学致师生校友捐款倡议书 and 张浩妻子范莉萍求助信)
(b) I guess the couple turn down public defenders.
回复

使用道具 举报

沙发
发表于 6-9-2015 09:09:30 | 只看该作者
看了下美国政府对天津大学张浩商业间谍案的起诉书:www.justice.gov/file/440431/download 。想法:1.凭里头的材料,定罪恐怕板上钉钉。2.“10亿美元”成为创业常用语,雄心壮志和利欲熏心一线之隔。3.观察者网登其妻向网友募2千万律师费文不妥。律师没那么贵,穷网友给百万富翁捐款也别再出现第二次了
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

板凳
 楼主| 发表于 6-9-2015 16:40:36 | 只看该作者
看了下美国政府对天津大学张浩商业间谍案的起诉书:www.justice.gov/file/440431/download 。想法:1.凭里头的材料,定罪恐怕板上钉钉。2.“10亿美元”成为创业常用语,雄心壮志和利欲熏心一线之隔。3.观察者网登其妻向网友募2千万律师费文不妥。律师没那么贵,穷网友给百万富翁捐款也别再出现第二次了

(1) Thanks for the link to the indictment, which, however, I can not read--due to the dummy computers I am using at a certain University in Boston (which simply does not want outsiders to use a few computers reserved to search its own catalog). I will read it tomorrow.
(2) Of course Taiwan does not have the phrase 板上钉钉. I googled it.

(3) The nice part of being in US is transparency.
(a) US Attorneys' Manual. US Department of Justice, 1997.
(i) 971. Sufficiency of Indictment—Generally.
www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-re ... ndictment-generally
(ii) 972. Sufficiency of Indictment—Victims and Loss.
www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-re ... nt-victims-and-loss
(b) Evidences need not be supplied in an indictment (or an information--the latter for a misdemeanor). Compare
Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
(section 1 text)

(4) "律师没那么贵."
(a) Indeed, it is very expensive to TRY a case in US--both criminal and civil, both federal and state courts. For this reason, more and more cases (according to statistics) are settled before trial--everywhere in US,
(b) Most importantly, to me (because it happened to me both in Taiwan and in US) one can not be sure whether the lawyer you hire is loyal to you or not, whether her advice is to benefit her or you, or whether she will abandon yo at some point (even in appeal). That is why I read law and represent myself.
(c)
(i) Anthony DePalma, MIT Ruled Guilty in Antitrust Case. New York Times, Sept 3, 1992
www.nytimes.com/1992/09/03/us/mi ... antitrust-case.html
("By taking the high ground and battling the Government, MIT went through a costly -- more than $1 million, by its estimate -- and highly visible trial, partly broadcast on cable television, in which it sought to convince the court that the financial aid practices of select universities were not covered by the Sherman Antitrust Act, which is generally applied to corporate commercial activities")
(ii) Antitrust Compliance in the University Context. Division of the Vice President and General Counsel, undated.
ogc.yale.edu/antitrust-compliance-university-context
(iii) MIT suffered a total loss in federal district court--in a bench trial (tried by judge; in the absence of a jury; parties can demand a jury trial on when damage, or money, is involved; there US had wanted MIT to cease and desist: a permanent injunction, that is).  MIT spent at least another million in the appeal.  Following the Third Circuit’s decision, MIT claimed victory when it settled (its newspapers admitted having spent millions). But the claim was false. MIT had maintained all along that antitrust law applied to corporations only, definitely not to academia. The Third Circuit rebuked the University, but remanded the case to district court for a new trial based on its instructions (mainly, not per se but rule of reason -- jargon in antitrust law).

(d) I have observed several criminal trials in person. They were all one-sided.
(i) Benjamin Mueller and Jason Grant, Menendez Pleads Not Guilty to Bribery Accusations. New York Times, Apr 3, 2015www.nytimes.com/2015/04/03/nyregion/senator-robert-menendez-pleads-not-guilty-to-bribery-charges.html?_r=0
(“A [federal] prosecutor, Peter Koski, seemed to be commenting on the strength of his case when he said during the hearing that the government was ‘ready for trial at the earliest possible date.’  Mr [Abbe] Lowell[, counsel for US senator Robert Menendez] said: ‘Sure, they have had the case for three years. We have had it for one day [a day after grand jury handed down the indictment, defendants were arraigned].’   [New Jersey District] Judge [William] Walls set a tentative July 13 trial date for both men [senator and his co-defendant, a eye doctor]”)
(ii) On Apr 15, 2015 it was reported, “Sen Bob Menendez, D-N.J. reported Wednesday that his legal defense fund has raised nearly $1.3 million since it was launched last year.”
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表