日志
环球网太没有职业道德
热度 27 |
加拿大女游客在长城上撞倒中国老人，导致老人身亡，这是一个悲剧。作为媒体，本应该客观报道这一事故，呼吁游人注意安全，有关部门增加预防措施，等等。但是，环球网在报道中，捏造歪曲事实，煽动民族情绪，实在是没有职业道德。
在 加媒关注该国游客“撞死”中国老人 中，记者引用了多伦多太阳报的内容是：
另外一名死者亲属表示，“外国人撞倒老人后与同伴追逐嬉笑而去”。
加拿大女游客看起来简直禽兽不如，毫无人性。
我到Toronto Sun上找了一下相关报道，在 Canadian tourist accidentally killed Chinese woman on Great Wall 中，原文是这样的
“The foreigner was moving really fast. She was chasing (someone) and laughing and wanted to go between me and my wife,” the husband said.
我这么烂，三级不到的英语都能看出这两者的差距。我不相信记者会看不出来。
只能说，记者没有职业操守。
全部作者的其他最新日志
- • FNN为了反川也是拼了
- • 上证指数和道琼斯指数
- • 爱疯X
- • 昨晚吃多了
- • 闲散周六
- • 愚公砍树
发表评论 评论 (10 个评论)
- 回复 大卫
- “ The Canadian woman, Ms. Fortin, bought flight ticket back to Canada and refused to meet the family of the pitiful old grandma. Also, she said on the site where she killed the old lady that she should not be responsible to this accident if the tragedy had happened in Canada.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3035644/Chinese-woman-dies-accidentally-knocked-Canadian-tourist-Great-Wall-China.html
也不知哪个是真的
- 回复 冰蚁
- 从英文报道看，就是加拿大女游客和朋友打闹追逐，从老夫妻两人中间穿过，将老太太撞了。加拿大女游客当时根本没意识到把人撞死了，大概只觉得蹭了一下，就继续嬉笑打闹地跑了。然后发现出事，又返回了出事地点。
中国的记者多写几个字，把事情写清楚怎么那么难。
至于法律责任，在中国，过失杀人罪逃不掉吧。加拿大法律不知道怎么说。美国这里判Involuntary Manslaughter 应该也成立。
- 回复 Dracula
- Involuntary manslaughter需要能证明被告对造成的后果应该是foreseeable的。这件事的具体情况不清楚。不一定能达到beyond reasonable doubt的标准。民事案的标准低，老人的家属要求赔偿损失应该是可以。那个加拿大人拒绝同老人的家属见面，应该是听从了律师的建议，不说出对自己不利的话，让对方的律师在法庭上使用。
冰蚁: 从英文报道看，就是加拿大女游客和朋友打闹追逐，从老夫妻两人中间穿过，将老太太撞了。加拿大女游客当时根本没意识到把人撞死了，大概只觉得蹭了一下，就继续嬉 ...
- 回复 Sichuluanhuang
- 此事真假我不知道。但说环球网没有职业道德，还是太客气了。中国好多媒体都没职业道德，从毕的事就可以看出来。
- 回复 冰蚁
- 不需要foreseeable 吧。
Dracula: Involuntary manslaughter需要能证明被告对造成的后果应该是foreseeable的。这件事的具体情况不清楚。不一定能达到beyond reasonable doubt的标准。民事案的标准 ...
Involuntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought, either express or implied. It is distinguished from voluntary manslaughter by the absence of intention. It is normally divided into two categories; constructive manslaughter and criminally negligent manslaughter, both of which involve criminal liability.
- 回复 Dracula
- Three elements must be satisfied in order for someone to be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter:
冰蚁: 不需要foreseeable 吧。
Involuntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought, either express or implied. It i ...
1. Someone was killed as a result of act by the defendant.
2. The act either was inherently dangerous to others or done with reckless disregard for human life.
3. The defendant knew or should have known his or her conduct was a threat to the lives of others.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Negligent+manslaughter
- 回复 冰蚁
- 从你给的链接看不出来必须满足三条。链接中的相关部分摘录如下
Dracula: Three elements must be satisfied in order for someone to be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter:
1. Someone was killed as a result of act by the ...
Involuntary Manslaughter
Involuntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing of another human being without intent. The absence of the intent element is the essential difference between voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. Also in most states, involuntary manslaughter does not result from a heat of passion but from an improper use of reasonable care or skill while in the commission of a lawful act or while in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to a felony.
Generally there are two types of involuntary manslaughter: (1) criminal-negligence manslaughter; and (2) unlawful-act manslaughter. The first occurs when death results from a high degree of Negligence or recklessness, and the second occurs when death is caused by one who commits or attempts to commit an unlawful act, usually a misdemeanor.
Although all jurisdictions punish involuntary manslaughter, the statutes vary somewhat. In some states, the criminal negligence type of manslaughter is described as gross negligence or culpable negligence. Others divide the entire offense of manslaughter into degrees, with voluntary manslaughter constituting a more serious offense and carrying a heavier penalty than involuntary manslaughter.
Many statutes do not define the offense or define it vaguely in common-law terms. There are, however, a small number of modern statutes that are more specific. Under one such statute, the offense is defined as the commission of a lawful act without proper caution or requisite skill, in which one unguardedly or undesignedly kills another or the commission of an unlawful act that is not felonious or tends to inflict great bodily harm.
Criminally Negligent Manslaughter A homicide resulting from the taking of an unreasonable and high degree of risk is usually considered criminally negligent manslaughter. Jurisdictions are divided on the question of whether the defendant must be aware of the risk. Modern criminal codes generally require a consciousness of risk, although, under some codes, the absence of this element makes the offense a less serious homicide.
There are numerous cases in which an omission to act or a failure to perform a duty constitutes criminally negligent manslaughter. The existence of a duty is essential. Since the law does not recognize that an ordinary person has a duty to aid or rescue another in distress, an ensuing death from failure to act would not be manslaughter. On the other hand, an omission in which one has a duty, such as the failure of a lifeguard to attempt to save a drowning person, might constitute the offense.
When the failure to act is reckless or negligent, and not intentional, it is usually manslaughter. If the omission is intentional and death is likely or substantially likely to result, the offense might be murder. When an intent to kill, recklessness, and negligence are present, no offense is committed.
In many jurisdictions, death that results from the operation of a vehicle in a criminally negligent manner is punishable as a separate offense. Usually it is considered a less severe crime than involuntary manslaughter. Although criminal negligence is an element, it is generally not the same degree of negligence as that which is required for involuntary manslaughter. For example, some vehicular homicide statutes have been construed to require only ordinary negligence while, in a majority of jurisdictions, a greater degree of negligence is required for involuntary manslaughter.
Unlawful-Act Manslaughter In many states, unlawful-act manslaughter is committed when death results from an act that is likely to cause death or serious physical harm to another person. In a majority of jurisdictions, however, the offense is committed when death occurs during the commission or attempted commission of a misdemeanor.
In some states, a distinction is made between conduct that is malum in se, bad in itself and conduct that is malum prohibitum, bad because prohibited by law. In these states, the act that causes the death must be malum in se and a felony in order for the offense to constitute manslaughter. If the act is malum prohibitum, there is no manslaughter unless it was foreseeable that death would be a direct result of the act. In other states that similarly divide the offense, the crime is committed even though the act was malum prohibitum and a misdemeanor, especially if the unlawful act was in violation of a statute that was intended to prevent injury to other persons.
- 回复 冰蚁
- 比如 criminal-negligence manslaughter 里就说 Modern criminal codes generally require a consciousness of risk, although, under some codes, the absence of this element makes the offense a less serious homicide.
Dracula: Three elements must be satisfied in order for someone to be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter:
1. Someone was killed as a result of act by the ...
这里, although 后面在强调你的第三点不是必须。没有这点可以减轻判罚。