What a sorry lot that has gathered here on www.forumosa.com. I have no idea why so many of you are justifying and making excuses for this Taiwanese man’s behavior. I can only assume that you choose this route of twisted logic because you apply it to your own life as well. I’m happy to see that a few still have some sense of reality and call a spade a spade. This small , mother,_____ son of a _____ sucking,eating , Taiwanese man beat his child to death. Period.
Sensitized for the painsies that get their panties in a wad.
A learned professor out in Penghu who has been here THREE WHOLE YEARS has nailed it. NOT.
He wrote in the TT today, noting that WE ALL DID TO HER (see his explanation, sandman, for why): "I do not introduce these points to trivialize the events that lead to the death of “Little Sister Chiu.” Nor do I make these points as a result of culture shock or to berate the people of Taiwan. I know that any nation is very sensitive to criticism from a non-native, and I do respect and appreciate that.However, the sad fact is that if Taiwan as a nation, a people, a society and a culture does not honestly look into this socio-cultural dynamic then we have not seen the last “Little Sister Chiu.”
…"anyone living in Taiwan knows that the same dynamic of irresponsibility, unaccountability and duplicity exhibited in the case of “Little Sister Chiu” manifests itself millions of times each day throughout Taiwan in myriad venues. Such behavior seems to be a basic part of Taiwanese society and culture. As such, we are all responsible for what happened to “Little Sister Chiu.”
Note: George Thompson is an assistant professor in the department of applied foreign language at National Penghu Institute of Technology.
When ‘everyone’ is responsible for something, ‘no one’ winds up being responsible. There’s a cute little email that circulates on the subject.
The girl is dead from injuries sustained from blows administered by her father. I do not know if Taiwan has any legal recognition for ‘diminished capacity’ or if it would apply to his drunken state. That’s an issue for the courts.
The issue you might get me to agree that is appropriate for ‘all’ of us to consider is taking note of others and helping where appropriate and agitating for suitable protection and penalties for physical abuse.
To invoke the specter of ‘we are all guilty’ in the death of this little girl is simply tired, cheap rhetoric.
Hard to believe that ‘diminished capacity’ would include being drunk.
Allowing intoxication to reduce the severity of the offense in any way might be understandable at a conceptual level (although there certainly are conceptual arguments against it), but the practical effects of such a rule must surely keep any legal system from adopting it. (?)
Shucks Hobbes, I’ll bet you have trouble with the ‘Twinkie’ defense. That’s where ‘diminished capacity’ is shown from the results of ‘addictive’ and ‘uncontrollable’ ingestion of very large amounts of refined sugar. A lot of juries have problems with that as well.
With drinking though, it has been successful in getting charges reduced and penalties mitigated where it was successfully demonstrated that the individual was an alcoholic and had severe physiological problems. In an instance such as this in the U.S., it means the difference of murder, manslaughter, negligent homicide, etc., all with varying penalties. It could run from 18 months to the death penalty depending on jurisdiction.
Someone knowing Taiwan law might be able to clarify the possibilities in this, or a like, case.
I have problems with all kinds of things. Getting out of bed in the morning in my unheated apartment, pronouncing many Chinese words, and opening most prepackaged snacks without making a mess. The twinkie defense is a new one to me. But based on your description… yeah, I guess I’ll have to add it to the long list of things I have a problem with.
Hmm… yes, I guess I was not thinking about it in this way. But for some reason I thought that in most jurisdictions they were pretty unsympathetic to using intoxication as either a diminished capacity “defense” or as a means of negating the mens rea element of a particular crime. I thought that in order to make it work someone basically had to have slipped alcohol into your shirley temple without your knowledge. Who knows, though, I may just be getting old and confused. And like I said – I hadn’t really thought about the situation of the chronic alcoholic. Not sure how I feel about that one…
But, from what little I do know, it is apparently possible to obtain a type of oder (or recognition) from a Taiwan court certifying that you have some sort of mental incapacity, and this could include alcoholism. From what I understand, one who holds such a certificate is essentially exempt from the consequences (legal) of any acts he/she committs while suffering from whatever incapacity with which he/she is afflicted.
Like I said… I’m not really clear on this certificate thingy… seems kinda like a “get out of jail free” card from the Monopoly game…
Exactly. Sounds like the sort of thing any criminal worth his salt would cary around in his pocket as a matter of course. Good thing for us that doctors (unlike those unscrupulous attorneys) are not subject to lapses of ethics. Otherwise “I’m an alcoholic it doesn’t count” certificates very well could be available to anyone who had the guanxi or the cash to get hooked up.
I can’t find any backup on the 'net, but if I remember rightly, the Romans had a somewhat similar arrangement, at least regarding diminished responsibility for a mentally ill person, whom they called furioso. I don’t know the details. I mean, I don’t know what-all it would get a person out of, and I certainly don’t know if it would allow him to get away with a homicide.
A professor out in Penghu who has been here THREE WHOLE YEARS has nailed it. NOT.He wrote that WE ALL DID TO HER
Note: George Thompson is an assistant professor in the department of applied foreign language at National Penghu Institute of Technology.[/quote]
Today, a chap in Taichung wrote a strong rebuttal – free unpaid – letter to editor of the learned Penghu professor’s paid – NT$5 per word – commentary.
QUOTE: It is beyond question that the death of “little sister” Chiu is a tragedy of almost unspeakable proportions. To lay the blame on everyone and everything Taiwanese, however, is not only mistaken, it’s stupid and rude.
QUOTE: Frankly, I find Thompson’s opinion arrogant, condescending, poorly considered and utterly without merit. Perhaps he ought to seek employment in another country, where nothing bad ever happens, and everyone is polite, considerate and altruistic.
K. Avrom Medvedovsky of Taichung wrote the letter. It is very, very good and worth reading.
Today, a chap in Taichung wrote a strong rebuttal – free unpaid – letter to editor of the learned Penghu professor’s paid – NT$5 per word – commentary.[/quote]I take it Ms. Kuo has the day off today, and the computers are playing with themselves?
A professor out in Penghu who has been here THREE WHOLE YEARS has nailed it. NOT.He wrote that WE ALL DID TO HER
Note: George Thompson is an assistant professor in the department of applied foreign language at National Penghu Institute of Technology.[/quote]
Today, a chap in Taichung wrote a strong rebuttal – free unpaid – letter to editor of the learned Penghu professor’s paid – NT$5 per word – commentary.
QUOTE: It is beyond question that the death of “little sister” Chiu is a tragedy of almost unspeakable proportions. To lay the blame on everyone and everything Taiwanese, however, is not only mistaken, it’s stupid and rude.
QUOTE: Frankly, I find Thompson’s opinion arrogant, condescending, poorly considered and utterly without merit. Perhaps he ought to seek employment in another country, where nothing bad ever happens, and everyone is polite, considerate and altruistic.
K. Avrom Medvedovsky of Taichung wrote the letter. It is very, very good and worth reading.
I found Medvedovsky’s letter typical of foreigners who come here and feel if they kowtow and publically kiss local ass they will be accepted by Taiwanese society. Perhaps you should read another view of Thompson’s letter, this time from a Taiwanese with no reason to kiss ass.
[quote=“Comrade Stalin”]Perhaps you should read another view of Thompson’s letter, this time from a Taiwanese with no reason to kiss ass.
taipeitimes.com/News/edit/ar … 2003222357[/quote]
I’m lucky to know a lot of locals who think like this, but they are the ones you don’t notice on the street, or in traffic…
I found Medvedovsky’s letter typical of foreigners who come here and feel if they kowtow and publically kiss local ass they will be accepted by Taiwanese society. Perhaps you should read another view of Thompson’s letter, this time from a Taiwanese with no reason to kiss ass.
I’m curious which part of the letter amounts to “kissing local ass”? Apparently you think that anyone who objects to Taiwan-bashing - no matter how wrong-headed the critique may be - is merely sucking up.
Your intro philosophy prof would be proud of your profound perceptive abilites (/sarcasm)
If you read the letter again (try not to skip the difficult bits), you’ll find that my objection is with the premise and conclusion Thompson offers, and the logic by which he attempts to support it. I do not deny there are things in Taiwan worthy of criticism and reform. I object to the blanket statement that at the root of these issues lies “Taiwanese culture.”
What I really don’t care for is another asswipe foreigner sitting in judgement with nothing more than cultural arrogance to support weak and twisted logic. There’s plenty of things that could be improved in Taiwan - as with everywhere else on the planet. Tossing up traffic and television programming as evidence of what’s wrong with “Taiwanese culture” is, as I said, stupid and rude. Pointing THAT out is not ass-kissing.
I have no desire to be accepted by Taiwanese society - if I did, I’d make more of an effort to learn the language, or learn to appreciate the borderline inedible diet that passes for cuisine around here.
Your post demonstrates the same problem Thompson so blatantly reveals in his letter: Opening your mouth without taking the time to consider if what’s about to spill out has any relationship to reality.
Gonna have to side with Tovarisch Stalin on this one.
Your post to the TT looked, IMO, like just another excuse for bashing the North Americans - read USA, Americans - and not much more.
To use a situation such as the beating death of this poor child as an excuse to vent your personal grudges is nothing, I would think, one would wish to call attention to.
While I do not share some of the issues expressed by Mr. Medved. I see this as no reason to degrade the issues he raises. To do so is short sigted and exclusionary to his main message.
I do not see you addressing any of these as they relate to the cultural quandries they give rise to here on the island.
I find your dismissal of Mr. Medved as just "another asswipe foreigner sitting in judgement with nothing more than cultural arrogance to support weak and twisted logic. " as pretentious and self-serving. He reasonably states his case. If you disagree, so be it. But to simply dismiss him in this manner is not only rude, but paints you as nothing more than reactionary. And also, this puts you in the same category as you would place Mr. Medved.
Is this how you wish to come across?
I do not doubt your disagreement with the issues Mr. Medved. raises.
What I do question is whether you desire to address these issues or simply use them as a stump to spout simplistic anti-USA (Western civ.) platitudes rather than address the issues he raises.
The seperation of the two issues appears to be beyond your ability in this matter.
:bravo:
