this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2024
534 points (99.6% liked)

World News

39209 readers
3343 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Vietnam’s High People’s Court upheld the death sentence for real estate tycoon Truong My Lan, convicted of embezzlement and bribery in a record $12 billion fraud case.

Lan can avoid execution by returning $9 billion (three-quarters of the stolen funds), potentially reducing her sentence to life imprisonment.

Her crimes caused widespread economic harm, including a bank run and $24 billion in government intervention to stabilize the financial system.

Lan has admitted guilt but prosecutors deemed her actions unprecedentedly damaging. She retains limited legal recourse through retrial procedures.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 37 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I don't support the death penalty, but I won't be terribly sad if a criminal billionaire gets executed by their own government.

[–] Cornelius_Wangenheim 17 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

I fully support it for the rich and powerful just because prisons can't reliably hold them. If they're not put in the ground, they'll worm their way out of consequences eventually.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

Can I ask what's the cutoff? How much money/how high of a position qualifies you for the electric chair?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Higher than you’ll ever have to worry about.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 13 hours ago

About tree-fiddy

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] fritobugger2017 15 points 16 hours ago

Gonna need a really good "Go Fund Me"

[–] [email protected] 27 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Bring this shit to the US. Chop chop.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

They defrauded 12 billion, only have to pay 9? Sounds like they just made 3 billion.

[–] captainlezbian 28 points 17 hours ago

Return 3/4 of what was stolen to get execution downgraded to life imprisonment that’s not getting away with it.

That said, my general opposition to the death penalty does influence me here.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 18 hours ago

If these fucks face a realistic prospect of getting their heads chopped off? Sure, let 'em roll those dice.

[–] Sam_Bass 23 points 21 hours ago

We now have precedent y'all

[–] NotAnotherLemmyUser 29 points 22 hours ago (13 children)

The amount of people in here pushing for the death penalty when it's used on people they dislike is sickening...

This is a penalty that needs to be abolished, not expanded or made exceptions for.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 18 hours ago (6 children)

Revolutions aren't pillow fights.

[–] captainlezbian 9 points 17 hours ago

True, but they’re demands of a better world. There’s a difference between killing in a revolution and a 60 year old communist government executing an embezzler instead of giving her life in prison

[–] NateNate60 4 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

The state ending someone's life for breaking its laws and then having people here who would normally condemn the use of capital punishment compare it to a revolution and call it justified just because the state in question claims to be socialist is just so uniquely Lemmy.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (2 children)

Yea, I'm against the death penalty too. This shit shouldn't be legal. It should be illegal and brutal. Like the mob takes you to the square and threatens to lynch you unless you give away the billionaire persona. The cops turn a blind eye. Total societal shame. Collapse of moral and legal order. And then afterwards, we all feel bad about it and we legislate a ban on wealth hoarding so that our society never falls to those kinds of depths ever again.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Dasus 29 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

You're completely right.

However, I feel like I'd make an exception for people who massively contribute to an actual existential threat to humanity. Ie billionaires. All billionaires.

I'm not saying we should kill them. I'm saying we should use the possibility of that being on the table to make them pay their taxes. The entire planet is ruined by billionaires when we could literally everyone have enough to have our basic needs met while having an economy and industry which isn't on track to make the planet uninhabitable for us, seeing as it's the only planet known to support life.

Yes, all life is important. That's why all life should be protected by making sure the planet doesn't become one huge airfryer. If while doing that a few billionaires get guillotined, I'm honestly fine with it. I'd prefer they'd just actually help people instead of being selfish assholes, but if them being selfish assholes is putting everyone else in danger, then the choice is clear, no matter your views on the death penalty. (Which as you say, shouldn't be a thing.)

[–] [email protected] 6 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I dunno, reducing them to being not-billionaires and even not-millionaires would actually be a pretty just sentence IMO. I bet being reduced to a regular Joe would hurt some of them more than the death penalty

[–] Dasus 5 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

What's to stop them doing it all over again, given some starter money? Usually what makes these assholes so effective is their lack of empathy. That works well in capitalism.

White collar crime needs to start getting hard time in the same prisons that proper criminals go to. That'd be a deterrent, or a motivator to fix the prison systems.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Wogi 14 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

Nonsense. I oppose the death penalty for almost all crimes. It's just too easy to render an inaccurate verdict, and you can't undo an execution.

But we don't have any doubt about billionaires. They're verifiably guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt.

I also think they should be able to avoid the death penalty by giving up their wealth and living on minimum wage for a number of years equal to the number of billions they captured and withheld from society.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (4 children)

Why, though? The usual reasoning for abolishing the death penalty is the argument that we might make a mistake and mistakenly sentence innocent people to death. But what about crimes like this, where the crime is entirely on paper, fully documented, and with no risk that you're prosecuting the wrong person?

Edit: I'm not sure why I'm getting downvoted with no replies. I'm asking an actual question here, if you disagree why not state your opinion?

[–] NotAnotherLemmyUser 4 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I think it's a valid question. I wouldn't say that the only reason for abolishing the death penalty is because we might make a mistake... that definitely factors into it, but there's more to it.

Ask yourself what purpose does it serve to put someone to death? They're already in jail/prison and no longer a threat to society. Deterrence? Is the death penalty any more of a deterrence than a life sentence?

The only purpose I can think of for the death penalty is that it's for "Revenge". It doesn't actually fix anything in of itself. It doesn't resolve disputes, it doesn't really solve anything.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Because we've always said that we won't make any excuses for the terror when our turn comes.

[–] NotAnotherLemmyUser 3 points 13 hours ago

Can you expand on this?
Either you replied to the wrong comment, or you're clearly thinking of some context that I'm not, or it's related to some saying that I'm not familiar with.

[–] NateNate60 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I want to point out that this is already the standard for conviction. The finder of fact must find the accused to be guilty beyond all reasonable doubt before convicting them. So from a legal perspective, everyone convicted of a crime already has been proven guilty to the highest possible standard. If there is any shred of doubt at all about the guilt of the accused, they're supposed to be acquitted. It's only possible in retrospect when new evidence emerges that exonerates the accused that it can be determined that the original guilty verdict was incorrect. You can't really "force" this evidence to emerge with any amount of policy changes. It just happens over time.

For example, witnesses lie. Maybe five years after the fact they feel bad about lying and retract their testimony. Maybe some of the investigators assigned to the case just made up some evidence to get the accused convicted in court because they just thought there was no way he could be innocent and they just needed to cook up the evidence to get them declared guilty, and they can only admit that when the statute of limitation passes. Or maybe, three years later, a convenience store manager deleting old footage happens upon a CCTV tape giving the accused an alibi. Or maybe still, the accused was actually framed and their framers only got caught ten years later doing some other crime, and it turned out that they forged the accused's signatures on those documents and used their computer to send those e-mails without their knowledge. I could go on.

So if your proposed standard is applied, it would not actually exclude anyone from execution because everyone who's been convicted has already been proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ouch 14 points 20 hours ago

Seems to be a common mindset among americans. As european I don't understand it.

[–] A7thStone 3 points 16 hours ago

Pearl clutching liberals? Not once.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] phoneymouse 91 points 1 day ago (8 children)

Two things America loves: billionaires and the death sentence. It has just never thought to combine them in this way.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 181 points 1 day ago (5 children)

All we gotta do is sentence a handful of billionaires to death and watch the behaviour change when they realize they're not insulated from consequence anymore.

[–] Hugin 39 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah but what they are going to do is make sure they get those protections back. They aren't going to get better.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Then sentence more of them as necessary. Im all for sweeping changes but we're not getting them. Convincing America to kill someone seems way more likely to me.

[–] crank0271 24 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You didn't hear it from me, but I heard that billionaire skipped the fare on the subway...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Hold them accountable for all the preventable deaths resulting from them screwing around with the economy. 2008 would have seen a ton of them going to prison for the rest of their life.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] NewNewAccount 23 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Imagine all the outrage from red state conservatives if we attempted this.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 hours ago

Oh who cares, they get outraged when a day ends in y.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 14 hours ago

There wouldn't be any outrage outside of 100s of the wealthy donors. Liberals would completely be more outraged because of norms and civility. The entire point of "drain the swamp" was that most people hate oligarchs, the point of Republicans is to redirect this off into racist and unproductive channels, where nothing ever comes of this hate for corporate and wealthy overlords.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 day ago

Or from blue state liberals because "we're better than them" or some shit.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

Mamma, what did you bring me to save me from the gallows pole?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I dont get it. If you kill them you get the money anyway, right?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

If it's hidden or off-shore, probably not.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] poo 5 points 19 hours ago

If only all "tycoons" could face execution...

[–] RangerJosie 23 points 1 day ago

This is the right way to deal with these ghouls.

[–] [email protected] 58 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Can we do this in Canada?? I know of a few deserving candidates

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Skullgrid 41 points 1 day ago (4 children)

returning $9 billion (three-quarters of the stolen funds)

You can keep the 3 billion and live?

reducing her sentence to life imprisonment.

but it has to be in jail?

[–] TheTechnician27 39 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You can keep the 3 billion and live?

No, as another comment pointed out, that isn't legal. The assets she has from her embezzled money aren't liquid; she doesn't have $12 billion literally sitting in a bank account. These have to be sold off for đồng, and especially if she's forced to quickly sell them off in exchange for her life (somehow another reason why the death penalty is stupid), she'll likely retrieve substantially less than she could otherwise by being able to wait for better opportunities to sell.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Ekybio 47 points 1 day ago

Nice to see some good news for once

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›