Great job getting jail time for the bad guys. That being said, I hope you make it to your retirement in Europe in one piece. God bless
3 Likes
At this point, in the interests of living a long and healthy life…maybe it’s time to give up surfing?
1 Like
That’s crazy talk. Dude’s gotta be surfin’.
1 Like
Fixed it for you.
It took you nearly getting killed to realize that Taiwan is not a safe place? You are unlikely to get randomly attacked, but get in a dispute with a Taiwanese and well you know what happens. You experienced it first hand.
1 Like
Not that I really pay attention to the media, but what “extensive” coverage do banana peel man etc. get? One news cycle and out, no? Maybe a talk show if it’s amusing (which this obviously isn’t)? Which is what this case got, and what other similar cases involving locals get.
I am not concerned of the crimes that I may live in Taiwan (rates are pretty low). I am concerned about the afterwards: police and media unfairness, prejudice and racism towards foreigners.
8 Likes
banana peel
Eye was twitching again
1 Like
I have just been with a legal expert who told me that the attempted murder charge carries between 5 and 7.5 years. She also said that they got a reduction of 1.5 years for surrendering themselves in the police station.
My guess then is that 2 got the minimum of 5 years and with the reduction it came down to 3.5 years, one got the max of 7.5 years and with the redaction he got 6 and the other one who got 5 years I am not sure, but it´s like he got 6.5 and got reduced to 5.
One got extra time for having a prior for attempted murder as well and not sure if another one got a something for having some unrelated priors (burglary and drugs).
1 Like
Thank you for the update.
But isnt that contradicting what the judge/prosecutor has said (I am referring on uour post 194) ?
I think that is for murder (post 194), but the sentencing is attempted murder. These carry different sentences.
Bottom line, will you appeal the sentencing ?
And out of curiosity, how much financial compensation are you seeking from them ?
Have you had any hospital bill you (for some reason) have to pay yourself ?
No I will not appeal, but if they do I will keep fighting in Court.
I´m asking 2 million NT.
Of course I have bills and medical reports.
Here’s a summary of interesting points in the judgement. I’m just paraphrasing from a quick read through; this is not intended to be a highly accurate translation. I do not claim to have extensive knowledge of criminal law, and I apologize for any misunderstandings that may occur. My comments are in italics.
- Defendants: Yes, we attacked him, but not with the pointy ends of the rods, and we didn’t know him, so we had no reason or motive to kill him.
- Judge: The account of the impartial witness, the account of the accuser, and the medical evidence all match up. The defendants’ words are hollow.
- Three of the rods are 90.5 cm and 1.8 kg, and the fourth is 100.3 cm and 2.1 kg. They’re made of solid iron and capable of killing a person.
- Defendant Wu, 33, is a high school dropout and works as a backhoe driver. Defendant Li, 23, is a high school dropout and works as a driver. Defendant Tsai, 36, is a college (高職) dropout and works as a farmer. Defendant Tseng, 29, is a university dropout and works as a laborer. The defendants are obviously not clueless, so they should know that hitting someone with heavy, solid metal rods can result in death.
- Defendant Wu claims he acted in self defense after the accuser hit him, and defendant Li claims he acted in self defense after the accuser threw away his surf board and assumed the stance of a boxer.
However, they both agree that the accuser was unarmed. - In a fight of 4 against 1, when the outnumbered party crouches down and covers his head, there’s no need to keep attacking him, unless you want to kill him.
- All four defendants are guilty of attempted homicide (Criminal Code Art. 271).
- All four defendants are principal offenders acting jointly (Art. 28).
- The behavior of all four defendants can be objectively recognized as the intent to kill one person at a specific time and place, so it should be considered one crime. (被告4 人持續以釣竿插座揮擊、刺擊告訴人之行為，依社會通念，客觀上足認係出於一個單一殺人未遂犯意而接續為之，符合於密接時、地之接續犯概念，應僅論以一罪。)
Reasons for increasing and/or reducing the sentences:
- Defendant Wu, in a 2014 larceny case at the same court, was sentenced in 2016 to 1 year in prison, which was reduced to 6 months and paid off as a fine. Committing another crime within 5 years makes him a recidivist and subject to an increased sentence (Art. 47 Par. 1). (I’m not entirely clear on how these sentences work. The fine was paid on 2016-04-29, but apparently the sentence was announced on 2016-01-18, so I guess he served some time. 103年度易字第320號 says the fine was NT $900/day. Also, a quick search shows that’s not his only prior conviction, though most of the cases in which he’s mentioned are not convictions, or not his convictions.)
- For all four defendants, because the attempted crime was not successful, the sentence can be reduced (Art. 25 Par. 2, which does not specify the extent of reduction permitted).
- Because all four defendants turned themselves in, the sentences can be reduced (Art. 62; NB: the official translation of this article is questionable). The Supreme Court has found that turning oneself in does not need to include a confession that matches the facts of the case entirely (最高法院91年度台上字第5203號).
- Officer Ma:
Although the owner of the vehicle was tracked down (presumably referring to the vehicle behind which the defendants hid while waiting for the right moment to strike), we didn’t know who might have borrowed the vehicle. - Officer Chiang: Until the defendants turned themselves in, there was no way to confirm the suspects’ identities. The owner of the vehicle confirmed that he did not know who had driven the vehicle.
- Despite the inconsistency between what the defendants confessed to and what they were ultimately found guilty of, the fact that they were brave enough to turn themselves in shows that they were repentant, (考量其勇於面對司法，可徵悔悟之心) which is sufficient for a reduction in accordance with Art. 62. (I think I’ll trade my bandana for an eyebrow, so I can go like this
. Yet see below…)
- As defendant Wu has 1 increase and 2 reductions, the increase precedes the reduction (Art. 71 Par. 1), and the reductions are progressive (遞減之) (Art. 70). As the other defendants have 2 reductions each, the reductions are progressive (Art. 70).
- Officer Ma told the defendants not to fish in the area. Even though the accuser cut their fishing line, they could have avoided conflict by not returning to the same place to fish, yet they waited for him to come ashore exhausted, with the intention of murdering him. Wu was the leader (領導), Li followed soon after, and Tsai and Tseng came last.
- Considering that Wu and Li denied stabbing (admitting only to hitting), and that Tsai and Tseng initially denied hitting at all, all four defendants have bad attitudes and lack remorse (犯後態度均有不佳，未見悔意). However, considering that Li, Tsai and Tseng have no prior convictions, and that the four defendants divided the work (分工; seems to mean “the work of killing the guy”), and that the defendants are relatively young and work as drivers, a farmer and a laborer, with educations ranging from incomplete high school to incomplete university, and their families are economically moderate (家庭經濟狀況勉持或小康), they are sentenced accordingly.
Further comments on the text are certainly welcome. Do 勉持 and 小康 have official definitions?
9 Likes
Maybe you already know this, but the Pingtung County Police Bureau seems to have English translations of those terms on this webpage, under the first heading, “Personal Information,” at item number 10:
https://www.ptpolice.gov.tw/en/home.jsp?id=53&parentpath=0,6,36
This looks sort of official (upper-right side of the page, “State of Family Economy”), on a page having to do with juvenile cases. There seem to be some differences between this set of terms and that of the Pingtung County Police:
https://www.judicial.gov.tw/juds/year106/09/106.pdf
But both of the terms you mentioned are in each of those two sets of terms.
This looks like it might be a discussion of the first term, in September of 2010:
The second term shows up on Wikipedia, but in this article it’s in reference to the PRC:
2 Likes
I’d translate them as “working class” and “middle class,” but they’re pretty subjective terms.
2 Likes
While on trial 3 of them had a paid lawyer (Wu, Li and another) and one a public defender (one of Tsai or Zeng). All 3 with private lawyer denied hitting me, although Wu claimed that I attacked him 1st and that the one taking blame came later to rescue him. So all 3 with private lawyer denied any hitting and the one with the public defender said that he hit me with the intent to hurt not to kill. I think that its not a coincidence that the ones with private lawyer are the ones denying any hitting.
I didnt know who was who until now, and actually it made me feel a little better, because Wu who got the 6 years was the one waiting outside of the car while his partners were in the car so he was the one most eager to attack me. Also I remembered Li hitting me with evil face as he was the 2nd hitting and after him I could not see faces anymore, just bodies in motion. I always knew that the one taking blame with the public defender was orchestrated by all of them and I think that he is the one stabbing me in the heart area as he had more chances to be on the left side and the fact that he pacted with his friends taking the blame is because by stabbing me the case got much worse for them. He got the lowest sentence, but somehow I feel that Wu (especially Wu for promoting the attack) deserves what he got while probably the one tabbing me who got the lower sentence at least showed courage by taking the blame but in the end got the lowest sentence. Somehow I appreciate his action of taking blame for his friends.
1 Like
I would sue for a hell of a lot more than 2 million.
How much?
If we were in the US we would be looking into mid 6 digits USD, but we are in Taiwan.
I consulted with a lawyer who told me that if yu die in Taiwan they just give your family 2 million NT and he suggested 600k NT.
They would be suing for 7 digits in the US, not 6. But that’s largely because 4 on 1 would be extremely frowned on by most Americans, and that as a result you were stabbed within an inch of your life would probably get you those 7 figures.
Different culture in Taiwan. Ganging up on a foreigner, while not accepted universally here, seems to be somewhat the norm and thus understandable.
Anyway, best of luck. I hope you get every cent of NT$2M, and more.
5 Likes
What’s with the gang up culture here?