Anger After British Man Executed In China

[Peter_]

This is why he was convicted below taken from HERE

He had been convicted of carrying up to 4,030 grams of heroin at Urumqi International Airport from Dushanbe, capital of Tajikstan, on Sept. 12, 2007.
China's Criminal Law stipulates that the trafficking of more than 50 grams of heroin is punishable by death.
.

He had a 15 minute evaluation to say that he was Bi Polar or Schizophrenic, smells of desperation as any diagnosis would take much longer, taken from HERE

Though he has never been assessed by a psychiatrist, Foreign Office officials were eventually allowed to spend 15 minutes with Shaikh. From their description of Shaikh's behaviour, Dr Peter Schaapveld, a London-based consultant clinical and forensic psychologist, compiled a medical report in which he was able to deduce with "99% certainty" that he was suffering from a mental disorder that could either be bipolar or schizophrenia.

He had no medical history of mental illness and they had over 2 years to provide any records to prove otherwise.

Below taken from HERE

Yet we have heard contradictory accounts about his mental state - his family and sympathizers portraying him as not of sound mind, while the plaintiff reportedly ruled out the possibility of himself or his family having a history of mental disorder.

That the court delivered the death sentence indicates it had no doubt about the plaintiff's state of mind. The counterclaim, on the other hand, lacks the support of evidence to make the justices believe.

If the was a shred of truth regarding him being ill, then I find it strange that except for the 15 minutes examination stated above above, that the is not one single record about him being ill until he was caught carrying drugs into a country that has an automatic death penalty for amounts exceeding 50grams and he was carrying over 4 kilos.

He was caught and no real proof came to light in over 2 years regarding his mental state and therefore he was duly executed for his crime.

[idi banashapan]

this is all so very futile. he's dead.

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Moldova

If the was a shred of truth regarding him being ill, then I find it strange that except for the 15 minutes examination stated above above, that the is not one single record about him being ill until he was caught carrying drugs into a country that has an automatic death penalty for amounts exceeding 50grams and he was carrying over 4 kilos.

He was caught and no real proof came to light in over 2 years regarding his mental state and therefore he was duly executed for his crime.

From one of your own links;

"Chinese law says a defendant's mental state should be taken into consideration if they are accused of serious crimes, but the Chinese authorities have refused repeated requests for Shaikh to be evaluated by a doctor."

This is the crux of the argument.

Nobody is disputing that he trafficked drugs, knowingly or otherwise, nobody is saying he was innocent from a legal perspective.

The issue here is that he was denied a legal entitlement and executed when under their own legislature the Chinese, without any prerequisite for proof but simply in light of the seriousness of the crime, were obliged to have his mental health assessed and they refused to do so.

[webcrawler2050]

Seriously now, does it matter. It's be done and dealt with. We should all know, the Chinese deal with it their way and their way only.

[SMG]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

The issue here is that he was denied a legal entitlement and executed when under their own legislature the Chinese, without any prerequisite for proof but simply in light of the seriousness of the crime, were obliged to have his mental health assessed and they refused to do so.

The defence was given 2 years to provide some, any, form of proof, that he was mentally ill. They failed, the sentence was carried out.

End of in my book.

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by webcrawler2050

Seriously now, does it matter. It's be done and dealt with. We should all know, the Chinese deal with it their way and their way only.

Yes, I personally think it does matter.

As I said earlier if we are to condone or turn a blind eye to the barbaric execution of people because a system sees fit to ignore certain legal obligations then we are hardly in a position to criticize or stand up for the rights of other parties whenever they decide to behead or execute people because of "their laws" in "their country".

SMG with all due respect, and as has been pointed out several times in this thread, his mental illness, or otherwise, could easily have been established by means of an evaluation during the course of his detention. The Chinese repeatedly refused to allow any such evaluation to be carried out.

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

The issue here is that he was denied a legal entitlement and executed when under their own legislature the Chinese, without any prerequisite for proof but simply in light of the seriousness of the crime, were obliged to have his mental health assessed and they refused to do so.

But is this surprising, when China is a one-party state in which Law and Party are intertwined and not entirely separate? The Chinese people themselves suffer under the whim of local party officials, so what chance have foreigners got, when convicted of serious crimes? The judge wanted him dead, the judge made him dead. Unpleasant, but that's the way it is in China, and that, rather than any of the legal technicalities specific to this case, is the real issue.

We would all be better off getting hot under the collar about how we're causing this unreformed, undemocratic monster to build itself into one of the most powerful nations on Earth, thanks to our own insatiable demand for cheap high street goods.

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

From one of your own links;

"Chinese law says a defendant's mental state should be taken into consideration if they are accused of serious crimes, but the Chinese authorities have refused repeated requests for Shaikh to be evaluated by a doctor."

This is the crux of the argument.

Nobody is disputing that he trafficked drugs, knowingly or otherwise, nobody is saying he was innocent from a legal perspective.

The issue here is that he was denied a legal entitlement and executed when under their own legislature the Chinese, without any prerequisite for proof but simply in light of the seriousness of the crime, were obliged to have his mental health assessed and they refused to do so.

The piece you posted from my previous post says that they had 2 years to provide external medical proof and they failed so any examination would only show illness after he was caught not prior to or at the time of the smuggling.

Doctors keep medical records of patients but the were none for him showing mental illness, speaks of desperation and trying to use any means to stop his execution.

[webcrawler2050]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Yes, I personally think it does matter.

As I said earlier if we are to condone or turn a blind eye to the barbaric execution of people because a system sees fit to ignore certain legal obligations then we are hardly in a position to criticize or stand up for the rights of other parties whenever they decide to behead or execute people because of "their laws" in "their country".

SMG with all due respect, and as has been pointed out several times in this thread, his mental illness, or otherwise, could easily have been established by means of an evaluation during the course of his detention. The Chinese repeatedly refused to allow any such evaluation to be carried out.

Thats the point, it doesn't really matter. It's not like he was a "brit" anywho. So it don't matter. It's down to his birth country in my eyes to deal with him / it.

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Moldova

The piece you posted from my previous post says that they had 2 years to provide external medical proof and they failed so any examination would only show illness after he was caught not prior to or at the time of the smuggling.

Doctors keep medical records of patients but the were none for him showing mental illness, speaks of desperation and trying to use any means to stop his execution.

I'll quote your link again for you "Chinese law says a defendant's mental state should be taken into consideration if they are accused of serious crimes, but the Chinese authorities have refused repeated requests for Shaikh to be evaluated by a doctor."

That's their law that they ignored. Does that make it any clearer for you? As Chris has said they wanted him dead and, it would appear, at any cost. The judiciary, and indeed a fair contingent of the population, have not forgotten England's complicity in the opium wars and they will be seeking restitution and revenge for quite some time to come.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

I'll quote your link again for you "Chinese law says a defendant's mental state should be taken into consideration if they are accused of serious crimes, but the Chinese authorities have refused repeated requests for Shaikh to be evaluated by a doctor."

That's their law that they ignored. Does that make it any clearer for you? As Chris has said they wanted him dead and, it would appear, at any cost. The judiciary, and indeed a fair contingent of the population, have not forgotten England's complicity in the opium wars and they will be seeking restitution and revenge for quite some time to come.

Opium War from 1856 to 1860. reality check please

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

I'll quote your link again for you "Chinese law says a defendant's mental state should be taken into consideration if they are accused of serious crimes, but the Chinese authorities have refused repeated requests for Shaikh to be evaluated by a doctor."

That's their law that they ignored. Does that make it any clearer for you? As Chris has said they wanted him dead and, it would appear, at any cost. The judiciary, and indeed a fair contingent of the population, have not forgotten England's complicity in the opium wars and they will be seeking restitution and revenge for quite some time to come.

Why did he ever need to be evaluated as the is no prior medical records from any of the countries he has lived in saying that he was mentally ill, so any examination would only prove was that he was ill when examined not at the time of the offence.

If the was proof of mental illness then they were wrong but as the is no prior proof just his desperate family and friends trying anything to obtain his release by any means possible.

[webcrawler2050]

Either way. Hes dead. So regardless of his "state of mind" hes dead. Serves him right. Regardless. I see no argument for this. We all know why they did it.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Opium War from 1856 to 1860. reality check please

That's a long time to hold a grudge. how long they been giving us the Made in China tat for now?

[NoKnowledge]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Opium War from 1856 to 1860. reality check please

reality check: check - It happened therefore real