Doctor tells of harrowing arrest after calling popular tonic ‘harmful’ in blog
globaltimes.cn
globaltimes.cn
This tale, of a state imprisoning one of its citizens over what should be a civil matter at most, sounds familiar...
E-waste recycler loses appeal on computer restore disks, must serve prison term https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16921634
That's not the same at all. That was consumer fraud.
I agree with you that our legal system states he broke the law, but the same may be true of the story in China. The state always justifies its behavior with the law, but that doesn’t make it justice.
that same act
I think what jack9 is saying is that it's not the same act.
Fixed your sentence. There's no analogy at all.
So it's to be understood that the police are just hired thugs in China? Whoever pays the most gets to have anyone arrested? Disgusting.
The west isn't perfect, but at least we have the decency to feel ashamed when this sort of thing happens.
> I read Michael Lewis's article in Vanity Fair about this case back in 2013, and I remember being struck by this excerpt in particular:
> [Goldman] called the F.B.I. in haste, just two days before, and then put their agent through what amounted to a crash course on high-frequency trading and computer programming. McSwain later conceded that he didn’t seek out independent expert advice to study the code Serge Aleynikov had taken. (“I relied on statements from Goldman employees.”) He himself had no idea of the value of the stolen code (“Representatives of Goldman told me it was worth a lot of money”) or if any of it was actually all that special (he based his belief that the code contained trade secrets on “representations made by members of Goldman Sachs”)...The F.B.I.’s investigation before the arrest consisted of trusting Goldman’s explanation of some extremely complicated stuff, and 48 hours after Goldman called the F.B.I., Serge was arrested.
> That, as the complaint highlights, the FBI instinctively acted as Goldman's punitive arm rather than conducting an independent investigation into the facts of the case is disturbing, regardless of the merit of the allegations.
So yes, the police act as hired thugs in the US too, if you are wealthy enough to be able to afford it.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Aleynikov
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9045313
[2] http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2013/09/michael-lewis-goldman...
EDIT:
Even better example: Louisiana school board hires a cop to be present as security officer during a meeting. He then proceeds to arrest the teacher who protested the board's decision on the issue being discussed. Many of the people who watched the video (me included) believe that the cop was there to do exactly that--intimidate teachers into silence and use force on those who could not be silenced.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/01/10/577010534...
Yes, in this case.
> if you are wealthy enough to be able to afford it.
They won't take money, if that's what you're saying.
If they think they can get credit for an easy prosecution for a big crime without too much due-diligence, I don't see why they should care if the accuser is wealthy.
And, one would have to be SUPREMELY naive to think that a system of informal kickbacks doesn't exist between rich people and the police officers they know.
Aleynikov did download Goldman-owned files and basically got off at the Federal level because his case sort of fell into the cracks of the law. This kind of case now IS criminal and is covered by the "Theft of trade secrets clarification act of 2012". He also was not given his Miranda rights in a timely fashion and so this, quite correctly, suppressed a bunch of evidence.
I am, by no means, defending the government's conduct in the Aleynikov case. The conduct of the New York Attorney General was especially egregious and was almost certainly driven by being buddies with Goldman.
However, the equivalent would be the police showing up and arresting Aleynikov simply because he published a blog post calling Goldman a "den of thieves" and they lost a contract because of it.
And, if I'm being honest, most people would not approve of what Aleynikov did. Only those of us who work with code and find most corporate claims around it in courts of law quite non-sensical would find Aleynikov a sympathetic defendant.