200906230954521010_1.jpg

先說明,不要把文章內容或任何一部分轉貼去任何地方/告訴任何人,

或和任何人公開/私下討論.請自重.No Excuse Again!

我請示美國律師的問題:

對不起,想請示你一些問題:

1-
jh這樣的例子,所謂的社會服務包括那些?
陪伴老人?做義工?慈善演出?
因為我們完全不了解什麼叫:社會服務?
一天必須做幾小時?還是以jh的個人意願為主,自己安排時間?
或由法院全權決定?

2-
緩刑其間,他應該不可能照舊演出吧?代表他失去工作機會?
而且應該也不可以出國,舉辦任何須要出國的活動?
國內呢?

3-
據了解,李律師要上訴.這樣又要重新被審理?
有可能維持原判或重新被判下比原判嚴重的刑罰對嗎?

4-
緩刑結束後,所有關於他涉及毒品的資料在警方手中會被銷毀?
還是會保留?
之前你有說出國會有問題,需要特別處理,這樣的情況屬於長期或是只限於緩刑期間?

5-
緩刑會不會留有案底?

==============================================================================

All good questions.  I’ll have to look into them and see what I could find in the next few days.  In the US, community service can range from picking leaves at a park to visiting senior citizens to fund-raising and anywhere in between.  For professionals and celebrities, they sometimes are given the opportunity to perform work consistent with their abilities.  The details are often decided by the probation office, consistent with guidelines set by the court (if the court has set anything).  But that’s the US practice.
   
全部都是很好的問題。我倒要看看他們,看看我可以在未來幾天內找到些什麼。

在美國,社區服務,可以從在公園採摘樹葉,探訪年長者,和幫助籌款之間。

對專業人士和社會名流來說,他們有時會被給予機會,從事符合自己能力社區服務。

細節往往由感化辦事處決定,符合法院所規定的準則(如果法院已設置了些什麼標準)

不過,這是美國的做法。

I’m interested in more info about what was said about the interest to appeal by either side.  When the defendants appeal, usually it’s because they want to challenge (i) the finding of liability itself (for example, tainted evidence or coerced confession, lack of evidence to convict, violations of due process, etc.) and/or (ii) the appropriteness of the sentence.  The defense here didn’t seem to have challenged the finding of drug use itself during trial, so the appeal may relate to the sentence.  If the latter is the case, it may be because they want to avoid the legal consequences of a suspended prison term (such as whether you can expunge the record, serve in the military, work in certain occupations, insurance coverage, travel bans, etc), or there is fundamental issue of fairness or civil rights involved, or the judge failed to consider certain mitigating factors (the judge did not mention the effect stemming from the dubious treatment by police or media in releasing his name but the JH camp didn’t seem to want to pursue that line too much, probably b/c it could backfire as being insufficiently remorseful ) or committed error in allocating weight to certain factors.  These are just my very wild guesses.  If the appeal by the defense focuses on the severity of the sentence, in most cases, the worst that may happen is the appellate court is not persuaded by the defense’s arguments and confirms the lower court’s sentence decision.  The chance of getting a more severe sentence is very, very slim.  Now if the prosecutor decides to appeal the sentence as too lenient, then you could potentially get a more severe sentence.  Also, if the sentence is appealed, then most likely the sentence would be stayed (that is, would not take effect to keep status quo) during appeal.  But I’m getting ahead of myself.  The first question is whether appeal will take place, who will file the appeal, and what the appeal is about.  There is a deadline for appeal, though I’m sure what it is under Korean criminal law.   
   
我比較感興趣的更多的信息來自於:在二者之一,上訴時,將會說些什麼趣味話題。

當被告上訴時,通常是因為他們要再次接受挑戰:

(一)發現自己的責任(例如,當污點證人或脅迫招供,缺乏證據被定罪,違反正當審訊程序,受到侵犯等)和/或者

( 二)適當的判刑。被告在這裡,似乎沒有在審訊期間,對於本身使用毒品後,挑戰其調查的結論,因此,上訴可能涉及到刑罰這一方面。

如果是後者的情況,可能是因為他們想暫停緩期徒刑,避免法律的後果,(如是否可以刪除記錄,服兵役,在某些行業工作,保險所包括的范圍,旅行禁令等),或有有關公正性或公民權利參與的基本原理,或法官沒有考慮某些減輕刑罰的因素(法官沒有提及因為警察或媒體在公佈他的名字後,所產生令人對他懷疑的的效應,但JH的陣營看起來並沒有在這一陣線上探求太多,很可能會適得其反並讓人充分後悔),或承認在衡量特定因素的輕重時,出現錯誤判斷。

這些只是我的猜測。如果被告的上訴重點在於刑罰的嚴重性,在大多數情況下,最壞的可能發生的是上訴法院沒有被被告的論點給說服,並確認了下級法院的判決決定

而得到更嚴厲刑罰的機會是非常,非常渺茫的。

現在,如果檢察官覺得如果這樣的刑罰過輕而決定提出上訴,那麼被告就有可能會得到更嚴厲的刑罰。

此外,在上訴的過程中,如果這樣的判決被提出上訴,那麼最有可能的判決將是保留原本的刑罰(即,將不會在現狀刑罰中產生任何嚴重效果)

但我超越了我自己好奇心。

--第一個問題是,是否將進行上訴,

--誰將會提出上訴,

--以及上訴的原因是什麼。

有一個最後期限讓他們提出上訴,但我敢肯定不管是什麼,它都將根據韓國的刑事法來處理。

The JH case is unfolding in interesting ways and has several dimensions that are beyond individual’s control or raise much more general questions about the military law, the press, the police, and basic rights issues.  The society can always criticize him for drug use, and it will for a while.  But it’ll harder to criticize his sentence as too lenient b/c it is disproportionately harsher when compared to the punishments given the established drug trafficker and distributor in this case on the same day.  (I fully expected them to get a break for providing valuable evidence to the police in exchange for leniency from the prosecutor and the court.  However, what they got from the judge was substantially more lenient than what the prosecutor recommended, which I thought was relatively lenient compared to what was recommended for JH.)  I’m still unclear what the result on military service is but, whatever it ends up, you can’t criticize him for escaping from or into active military service b/c clearly he’s stuck in a quandary created by the law itself.  Meanwhile, many people would have to agree that individual rights were trampled on, the police conduct was highly inconsistent and questionable, his use was quite mild and temporary, and he was more honest than most people would have been under the same circumstances.  (Few would have faulted him if he had chosen to use the negative test result as a shield and not hand the case to the prosecutor.  After all, by law it is the government’s burden to prove a case, not the other way around.  This is a very important modern legal principle). Then there is the large number of loyal fans who seem to have become even more loyal and are causing the opportunistic entertainment industry who has readily written him off to take notice and have second thought. 
   
在JH的案件,發現有趣的幾個方式,並有幾個層面,超出個人的控制或提高更一般性問題在有關於軍事法律,新聞,警察,和基本權利的問題。

社會總是可以批評他的吸毒案件,這也將維持一段時間。但它會更難批評於他的刑期是否過輕,因為在這案件,如果和規定給予毒販和分銷商的刑罰比較起來,JH所獲得的判刑,那是不成比例,更嚴厲的處罰。(我完全希望它們得到一個休息機會,可以提供寶貴的證據給予警察,以換取檢察官和法院更寬大的處理。)

然而,他們從法官所獲得的是比檢察官所建議的,更寬鬆的刑罰,(我認為和之前檢察官所建議給予JH的刑罰,是比較寬鬆的。)

我仍然不清楚結果服兵役的結果,無論它怎麼結束,誰也不能批評他有意去逃離或者選擇去服現役,因為很清楚的,他已經停留在法律本身所造成的窘境中

與此同時,許多人都會同意,其個人的權利已經被踐踏,警察的行事作風在這次案件中,是明顯的高度不一致,甚至充滿了疑問的,他對藥物的使用性是相當溫和的和短暫性的,在受到同樣偵查的情況下,他也比大多數人更誠實。(如果他選擇使用負面測試結果作為擋箭牌,而不是向檢察官自首坦白,幾乎沒有人會指責他。畢竟,在法律上的角度來說,它是政府的責任,必須證明此案件的情況下而提出指控,而不是從相反的角度來衡量。這是一個非常重要的現代法律原則) 。

其次是大量的忠實粉絲似乎已變得更加忠誠,並導致投機娛樂業者也很樂意地繼續報導,並採取了第二種想法。


No, don't think he'll appeal.  I think he wants to find a very quiet, private (private as in away from any public) and definitive way to get this behind, that's why he wants to be in active duty, which would have offered a clean break from all this mess.  B/c that's not going to happen so he'll have to figure out a way to transition out of his current state.  Even if he only received $ fine, It'll be very awkward, socially and psychologically, for anyone to transition back after all that have happened (not just the media but the betrayal and the destruction of a once-treasured past, which must cut even deeper).  He's very tough but very sensitive, so he'll need some space and time. 
   
不,不認為他會提出上訴。

我想,他希望找到一個非常安靜的,私人(私人在於遠離任何公眾)和明確的方式讓自己在這件事的背後好好反省,這就是為什麼他要服現役,這將提供一個乾乾淨淨的休憩時刻,以擺脫這一切的混亂

因為,這種安靜的狀況在目前來說是這不可能發生的,所以他就必須找出另一種方式,讓自己從他目前的狀態中,轉變去另一形態。

即使他只收到了罰款刑罰,這一切所發生的事情,在過渡時期之後,對任何人來說,這將是非常尷尬的,在社會觀點和心理想法上,(不只是媒體,也包括被背叛和毀壞一次珍貴過去的經歷,這樣的感慨都是一道道深刻的創傷),他是感覺到非常艱難的,但也非常敏感,所以他需要一些時間和空間去好好思考。  

 Not sure exactly when and where and what about the community service -- but I think it would be arranged in a way that's not too intrusive of him.  Remember, if the folks who have to supervise the service are busy and wouldn't want to have to deal with nosy reporters, etc.


不知道會在什麼時候和什麼情況下開始社區服務.

但我認為這會在不是太打擾他的方式下被安排妥當。

請記住,如果需要進行社區服務的人過於繁忙,而他也不會想和吵嚷的記者有過多的接觸,所以這些因素都會在安排他進行社區服務時被考慮在內
 
I don't know the practice of expunging the record in Korea.  One of the problem is that his drug conviction (actually even arrest without conviction or expungement of crim record) will cause inconvenience to travels to many places outside of Korea.  Normally, you can travel to quite a few countries (for example, Korea to Japan or US) without having to apply for a visa if the stay is relatively short.  However, many countries, including Japan and US, require you to apply for a visa if you have any drug-related arrest, which then can trigger additional background checks, delay at the airport, etc.  Many people don't reveal that (especially for arrests that took place long time ago) or are not aware of that and never get caught, but that's not an option to him.  (He wouldn't want to anyhow.)  B/c Japan is quite strict about this and b/c Japan is a big market, that means that, if he want to travel there for the next few years, his people may have to go through some troubles and do some leg work to make sure nothing embarrassing happens at the customs when he enters Japan.  

 
我不知道在韓國會不會刪去他的案件記錄。

其中一個問題是,他的毒品定罪(實際上,即使在沒有逮捕定罪或刪除犯罪的記錄的情況下)在前往許多韓國以外的地方,將造成不便。

通常,您可以前往不少國家(如韓國,日本或美國的),在短期的探訪時期是無須申請簽證。

然而,許多國家,包括日本和美國,如果您有任何與毒品有關的逮捕案件,則需要申請簽證,然後可能引發更多的背景調查,在機場毫不猶豫地拖延行程等等之類的負面影響.

許多人選擇不自動不吐露, (特別是逮捕是發生在很久以前的事) ,或不知道也並沒有被抓到,不過這不是JH的選擇。 (不管怎樣他也不會這樣隱瞞).因為,日本對這一方面是相當嚴格的,也因為日本是一個大市場,這意味著,如果他想在今後幾年去日本公幹,他本身可能要面對一些麻煩,做一些特別的行程工作,以確保當他進入日本海關時,不會有任何尷尬的情況出現。

During suspension, he should be able to do some stuff (that’s kind of the purpose of a suspension) but maybe with some restrictions, real or self-imposed.  Maybe he could at least record a song or two with his friend Kim Jae Woo (? the pastry chef) who seems to be fond of indie stuff anyhow so we have something to listen to, or some low-key stage work?! 


在緩刑期間,他應該可以做一些東西(這就是緩刑的目的) ,但也許有一些限制,實際的或自我施加的。也許他至少可以錄製一首歌曲或與他的兩個朋友-金在宇( ?的糕點廚師),那位看起來似乎喜歡獨立的工作,無論如何我們都必須聆聽;或者他也可以從事一些低調的表演工作!
 

For travel-related issues, it would depend on the law of each country of entry; it has little to do with how Korean law.  For the several countries I know of, I don’t think it would be limited to the period of suspension.  Obviously, use is much more common and is not treated the same as distributing, selling or manufacturing. 


關於旅行相關的問題,這將取決於每個國家的入境法律,它將取決於韓國的法律如何定奪

對於一些我所知道的國家,我不認為在緩刑期間,這將是被限制的。

顯然,使用違禁品較為普遍,而不是與發放,銷售或生產違禁品被一視同仁的處理。

    全站熱搜

    Celest 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()