A guide to “No Comment” police interviews

A guide to “No Comment” police interviews

This article has been taken from www.schnews.org.uk and is a guide to handling yourself in a police interview.

NO COMMENT – THE DEFENDANT’S GUIDE TO ARREST

When you have been arrested:

Q: What happens when I get arrested?

Q: When can I contact a solicitor?

1.     To have someone know where you are

2.     To show the cops you are not going to be a soft target; they may back off a bit

Q: What is an interview?

Q: Why do the police want me to answer questions?

1.     They want to convict you to make it look like they’re doing a good job at solving crime. The “clear up rate” is very important to the cops, they have to be seen to be doing their job. The more crimes they get convictions for, the better it looks for them.

2.     Police officers want promotion, to climb up the ladder of hierarchy. Coppers get promotion through the number of crimes they “solve”. No copper wants to be a bobby all their life.

Q: So if the police want to interview me, it shows I could be in a good position?

Q: But what if the evidence looks like they have got something on me? Wouldn’t it be best to explain away the circumstances I was arrested in, so they’ll let me go?

1.     Keep calm and cool when you are arrested. (Remember you are on their home ground).

2.     Get a solicitor.

3.     Never make a statement.

4.     Don’t get drawn into conversations with the police.

5.     If they rough you up, see a doctor immediately after being released. Get a written report of all bruising and marking. Remember the officer’s names and numbers if possible.

Remember:

·        An interview is a no-win situation. You are not obliged to speak.

·        If the police want to interview you, it shows you’re in a good position.

·        The only way to stay in that position is to refuse to be drawn into any conversation and answer “No Comment” to any questions.

1.     If you know what name they are using – as soon as you think they’ve been arrested, ring the police station. Ask whether they are being held there and on what charges.

2.     Inform a decent solicitor.

3.     Remove anything from the arrested person’s house that the police may find interesting: letters, address books, false IDs, etc in case the police raid the house.

4.     Take food, cigarettes, etc into the police station for your arrested friend, but DON’T go into the police station to enquire about a prisoner if you run the risk of being arrested yourself.

By Dark Politricks

Being arrested isn’t a whole lot of fun but it’s a whole world away from doing time at her majesties pleasure, and one of the most important factors which can turn an arrest into a conviction is the police interview and how you handle it.

Being interviewed, although not much fun in itself, can be seen in a good light when taken in context to how the police work. This is because it means the Police don’t have enough evidence on their own to charge with you an offence and are seeking to gather more incriminating evidence or even a confession from an interview.

The chances are that if you have been arrested for public order offenses or drunk and disorderly or other escapades leaving a nightclub you won’t get interviewed.

Instead you will be given free board in the cells and a court date in the morning. The reason for this is that you have committed your crime in front of witnesses (probably police officers) and they already have enough evidence at that point to charge you with an offence.

So if you have been nicked and the police do want to conduct an interview with you there is a good chance that they don’t have enough evidence at this point to charge you and they are hoping you will either confess all during the taped interview or slip up and incriminate yourself in some way that can be used against you.

I was taught the following lesson the hard way, but it’s one that should be memorized especially if you believe that one day the police may come knocking on your door:

Admitting anything in interview is doing the police’s job for them.

The reason why becomes very clear once you realize that there are multiple stages that someone will pass through once they have been arrested.

Once you understand the various hoops the legal process jumps through on the way to court you will see how much sense it makes to do a no comment interview even with the changes to the law passed in the much hated Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.

Remember never to talk to the police until your solicitor arrives and then you can at least tell the court if asked why you gave a no comment interview that you did so on the advice of your brief.

Once arrested the police have to decide whether or not they have enough evidence to charge you with a crime. If they are interviewing you then they are looking for you to either confess to the crime or implicate yourself or others in said crime. If the police believe there is not enough evidence at this stage to proceed with then you might get let off without being charged or you might be released on police bail to return to the station at a later date.

If you are released on police bail then this means they are still looking into the crime and weighing up whether or not they have a good enough chance of prosecuting you.

This is where the Crown Prosecution Service comes in and their job is to decide whether the evidence gathered by the police is enough to mount a successful prosecution as well as deciding whether or not it is in the public interest to proceed. You can read about the guidelines that the CPS have to use when making their decision in the following document titled The Code For Crown Prosecutors.

If the CPS believe that their is insufficient evidence to mount a successful prosecution then they have the power to discontinue any existing prosecution and if you haven’t been charged yet then you would be informed that no further action is to be taken (NFA) on the matter. Receiving an NFA letter through the post is almost as good as winning the lottery.

Even if the CPS do continue the prosecution you will have the chance to tell your side of the story in court either in front of a magistrate or for more severe crimes in front of a Judge and Jury.

Therefore you can see how by doing the police’s job for them by talking during an interview is not in your best interest as it can give both the Police and the CPS everything they require to proceed with a prosecution.

A No Comment interview is always in your best interest.

If you think you might one day run the risk of being arrested, you must find out what to do in that situation. If prison, fines, “community service”, etc don’t appeal to you, by following this advice you can massively reduce the risk of all three. In the police station, the cops rely on people’s naivety. Wise Up.

You have to give the police your name, address and date of birth. They also have the right to take your fingerprints, photo and non-intimate body samples. The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 has now removed the traditional “right to silence”. However, all this means is that the police/prosecution can point out your refusal to speak to them, when the case comes to court, and the court may take this as evidence of your guilt. The police cannot force you to speak or to give a statement, whatever they may say to you in the station. Refusing to speak cannot be used to convict you by itself. It’s yet to be seen how the police will use this change in the law, but we reckon the best policy if you want to get off is remain silent. The best place to work out a good defense is afterwards, with your solicitor or witnesses, not under pressure in the hands of the cops. If your refusal to speak comes up in court, the best defense we think is to refuse to speak until your solicitor gets there, then get them to agree to your position. You can then say you acted on legal advice. Keeping silent is still the best thing to do in police custody.

When you are arrested, you will be taken to a police station. You will be asked your name, address and date of birth. Your personal belongings will be taken from you. These are listed on the custody record and usually you will be asked to sign that the list is correct. You should sign immediately below the last item, so that the cops can’t add something incriminating to the list. You should also refuse to sign for something which isn’t yours, or which could be incriminating. You will then be placed in a cell until the police are ready to deal with you.

You should be able to ring a solicitor as soon as you’ve been arrested. Once at the police station it is one of the first things you should do, for two reasons:

It is advisable to avoid using the duty solicitor as they are often either crap or hand in glove with the cops. It’s worth finding the number of a good solicitor in your area and memorising it. The police are wary of decent solicitors. Also, avoid telling your solicitor exactly what happened; this can be sorted out later. For the time being, tell them you are refusing to speak. Your solicitor can come into the police station while the police interview you: you should refuse to be interviewed unless your solicitor is present.

An interview is the police questioning you about the offences they want to charge you with. The interview will usually take place in an interview room in the police station. An interview is only of benefit to the police. Remember they want to prosecute you for whatever charges they can stick on you. An interview is a no-win situation. For your benefit, the only thing to be said in an interview is “No Comment”. Remember, they cannot legally force you to speak.

If the police think they have enough evidence against you they will not need to interview you. In most public order arrests they rely on witness statements from 1 or 2 cops or bystanders, you won’t even be interviewed.

The police want to convict as many people as possible because:

A “solved” crime is a conviction against somebody. You only have to look at such cases as the Birmingham Six to understand how far the police will go to get a conviction. Fitting people up to boost the “clear up rate”, and at the same time removing people the cops don’t like, is a widespread part of all police forces.

Yes – they may not have enough evidence, and hope you’ll implicate yourself or other people. And the easy way to stay in that good position is to refuse to be drawn into a conversation and answer “No Comment” to any questions.

The only evidence that matters is the evidence presented in court to the magistrate or judge. The only place to explain everything is in court. If they’ve decided to keep you in, no amount of explaining will get you out. If the police have enough evidence, anything you say can only add to the evidence against you. When the cops interview someone, they do all they can to confuse and intimidate you. The questions may not be related to the crime. Their aim is to soften you up, get you chatting. Don’t answer a few small talk questions and them clam up when they ask you a question about the crime, it looks worse in court. To prosecute you, the police must present their evidence to the Crown Prosecution Service. A copy of the evidence will be sent to your solicitor. The evidence usually rests on very small points: this is why it’s important not to give anything away in custody. If they don’t have enough evidence the case could be thrown out of court or never even get to court. This is why they want you to speak.  they need all the evidence they can get. One word could cause you a lot of trouble.

The police try to get people to talk in many devious ways. The following are some pretty good examples, but remember they may try some other line on you.

THESE ARE THINGS THAT OFTEN CATCH PEOPLE OUT. DON’T GET CAUGHT OUT.

If you are nicked on very serious charges, or for serious violence to a police officer, the cops may rough you up, or use violence and torture to get a confession (true or false) out of you. Many of the people freed after being fitted up by the West Midlands Serious Crimes Squad, or coming to light now in Manchester, were physically abused till they admitted to things they hadn’t done. If this happens, obviously it’s your decision to speak rather than face serious injury, but remember, what you say could land you inside for a long time, even if it’s not true. Don’t rely on retracting a confession in court – it’s hard to back down once you’ve said something.

___________________________________________________________________

In the police station the cops rely on people’s naivety. If you are sussed the chances are they’ll give up on you. In these examples we have tried to show how they’ll needle you to speak. That’s why you have to know what to do when you’re arrested. The hassle in the copshop isn’t nice, but if you are on the ball, you can get off. You have to be prepared. We’ve had a lot of experience of the police and we simply say:

______________________________________________________________

Having said nothing in the police station, you can then look at the evidence and work out your alibi, your side of the story. This is how you will get off.

Q: What can I do if one of my friends or family has been arrested?

If someone you know is arrested, there’s a lot you can do to help them from the outside:

The police have been known to lay off a prisoner if they have visible support from outside. It’s solidarity which keeps prisoners in good spirits.

This information has been extracted from a pamphlet by London Anarchist Black Cross 27 Old Gloucester Street, London, WC1N 3XX via http://www.schnews.org.uk

The Truth About Police Misconduct Litigation

The Truth About Police Misconduct Litigation

February 22, 2010 @ 10:18 AM by David Packman

Late last week a federal jury in Brooklyn NY awarded $16,600,000 to a man who lost a leg after a Nassau County NY Sheriff’s Detective crushed his legs with his police cruiser when arresting him on allegations that he was making harassing phone calls his ex. In making their decision, the jury decided that the detective had acted with malice and intent when he hit the man with his cruiser to make the arrest.

Of course, when people think about police misconduct civil lawsuits, it’s this kind of case that they think about, generally because the cases where there is a large sum of money involved tend to make the most headlines and tend to alarm the public, who generally have to pay that bill one way or another. But, are all police misconduct lawsuits like this and are they as common as most people think?

Our National Police Misconduct Statistics and Reporting Project (NPMSRP) indicates that lawsuits as a result of police misconduct allegations aren’t actually as common as you would think and, when they do happen, aren’t nearly as beneficial to the victim as this one was.

In the last 10 months, the NPMSRP tracked 925 civil lawsuits regarding police misconduct reported in the media, this represents about 27% of all reports of police misconduct that were captured during that time period. What about all those other cases? As I mentioned in our Police Misconduct Victim’s Guide, getting an attorney to take a police misconduct lawsuit on is a lot more difficult than most people are led to believe.

Why?

During the same 10 month period, the NPMSRP statistical analysis indicated that, of the police misconduct lawsuits filed, only 1/3 of those resulted in an award for the plaintiff. Of the 33% of police misconduct lawsuits that resulted in a win for the victim, 74% were settled out of court and only 26% resulted in a favorable judgment for the victim.

So, police misconduct lawsuits are very difficult to win. Not only this, most police misconduct lawsuits are taken on a contingency basis since the victims are usually in debt already from the cost of defending themselves against criminal charges along with medical bills and sometimes even the loss of employment that can come from a false arrest, which occurs in many of the cases. When lawyers lose a contingency case it’s costly, they spend months developing these cases and spend a lot hiring detectives and professional witnesses like medical experts and former officers.

So, many lawyers are very selective about what cases they take, not because many of the cases don’t have merit, but because the risks of losing money on the case are greater than the potential win. This may seem like a surprise, but remember that not all cases result in large wins like the case in Nassau County. In fact, most don’t even come close.

Again, in that same 10 month period, the median award for all successful police misconduct litigation was $225,000. This means that half the cases won more than $225k and the other half won less than $225k. While whether a case was won in court or outside of court did affect the median outcome, it wasn’t as significant as you would think. Of the cases resulting in judgments the median award was $330,000 and settled cases had a median award of $207,500.

So, how much of that do lawyers take home? Well, it varies. Sometimes lawyers win legal costs as part of the settlement or judgment, but on a contingency basis they can stand to win a portion of the total award depending on the contract agreed upon between the victim and lawyer taking the case. In general, from my own experience, I’ve seen these range from a low 35% up to 60%, but generally stick around 40%.

So, an average judgment payout for a lawyer is around $133k, but remember that attorneys usually work on cases for several years when they are forced to go to trial, which is why they tend to prefer settlement offers and even tend to write this into contracts by taking a lower percentage cut when a case settles as opposed to a win, even though the payout tends to be less.

But, this isn’t the total cost of police misconduct litigation as the city has to pay it’s lawyers too, and they often turn to outside help to defend themselves against police misconduct litigation and that can be quite costly. In fact, more often than not the legal fees the government pays out are more expensive than the awarded amount, some documented cases indicate that the cost of a $300k judgment can cost taxpayers over a million dollars when all is said and done. Even when we don’t count legal fees and other associated costs of police misconduct litigation, the total cost to taxpayers over the last 10 months has been $245,606,510 in known settlements and judgments alone, though, over 10% of awards are unspecified due to non-disclosure settlement agreements.

There you have it, police misconduct lawsuits are a lot less common than you think, lawyers don’t come out of the woodwork whenever police misconduct happens, and the victims of police misconduct probably don’t win nearly as much as you think, despite what police organizations might try to tell you. This is why victims of police misconduct really need to understand what to expect once they become victims, because it’s not as easy as most people think to get compensation for the harms done by police misconduct.

http://www.policemisconduct.net/the-truth-about-police-misconduct-litigation/ 

Time difference between the Standard local time and on-line time for the blog

This post is published on Thursday 18th July, 2013 at 21:05.

Criticism of the Grounds of Judgment of SUM 2310/2013

1. I filed a suit S 257/2013 in the High Court against the Attorney-General for a wrongful arrest made by the police. Most of the claims were struck out in a recent hearing as they are barred by a 3 years limitation period (3 years rule).   

2. I think there are two flaws in the grounds of the judgment. One is that the Court admitted a fact established on the violation of my due process of law. The other is that the Court has applied different limitation periods (3 years rule v 6 years rule) against the same legal wrong. 

Facts 

3. While arrived in my flat in response to my call in 2009, the police officers refused to take my report and arrested me for breach of Personal Protection Order (PPO). The PPO was later discovered to be expired before the arrest so the police consulted the Attorney-General’s Chamber (AGC). 

4. The Honorable Attorney-General (AG) directed the police to take no further action against me as no offence was disclosed, though the police refused to justify what offence it was. I was neither charged nor brought before Court.  

Violation of due-process of law 

5. Two things are clear. One is that the arrest is unlawful as the police had no probable cause, or the existence of the PPO. The other is the AG’s abuse/unconstitutional exercise of prosecutorial power which has violated my due process of law. 

6. Every arrested person must be brought before a Magistrate within 48 hours for the Judge’s independent determination of the probable cause of a arrest. 48-Hours rule is meant to protect the arrested persons but not the police. 

7. While in a position to discontinue proceedings at any stage, the AG cannot contravene constitutional rights so he has no power to interfere the default procedure in a confirmed unlawful arrest case [1]. 

Malicious Prosecution

8. To prosecute is to set the law in motion by an appeal to some people clothed with judicial authority [2]. The police may prosecute a person by either charging him or bringing him before a Magistrate. Citing Martin v Watson [3], the learned counsel of the defendant concluded that I was not prosecuted. 

9. Suppose that a person failed to answer a police bail because the police station’s guard intentionally refused to let him in. The failure to answer the bail ought to be disproved by the Court as it was founded on the police’s violation of this person’s due-process rights.  

10. In the present case, the police were supposed to bring me before a Magistrate to submit information about my PPO violation and later request the Magistrate to withdraw the information due to the expiration of the PPO. 

11. As my absence before a Magistrate is caused by the AG’s unconstitutional direction, the absence ought to be disproved by the Court. In other words, I was supposed to be brought before a Magistrate by the police.  

Abuse of process (or: abuse/unconstitutional exercise of prosecutorial power)

12. The learned counsel argued that this claim failed as “no judicial proceedings [process] were brought against you”. Under 48-Hours rule, the judicial proceedings were meant to protect the arrested persons and the failure to initiate them technically helped the police to escape their responsibility for wrongful arrests. It is clear that the lack of judicial proceedings ought to be disproved by the Court as a result of the AG’s unconstitutional direction.   

Application of different limitation periods against the same legal wrong

13. According to a report of lian he zao bao in 2011, the time bar has been ruled as 6 years for false imprisonment claims. In the 2011 case [6], a man was wrongfully arrested by the police and unlawfully detained for some 3 years. While confirmed the use of the 6 years rule in 2011 case, the High Court in the present case adopted 3 years rule without justification.  

14. The learned counsel explained that the 3 years and the 6 years rules apply to personal injury and non-personal injury claims, respectively. Moreover, false imprisonment claim was a non-personal injury claim and was the sole claim in the 2011 case so 6 years rule applied. In the present case, claims other than false imprisonment have been made so the 3 years rule comes into force.  

False imprisonment = loss of liberty?

15. It is established that the only non-personal injury claim is loss of liberty claim [7], so the counsel assumed that false imprisonment equals to loss of liberty. 

16. The false imprisonment would certainly do persons harm other than loss of liberty such as physical injury, mental harm, loss of income etc. Moreover, the wrongful arrest and false imprisonment are interchangeable in police misconduct so the arrested persons must have suffered assault and battery. 

17. The counsel’s assumption is illogical and apparently contradicts the facts but was accepted by the Court so I leave it to the public to judge the nature of false imprisonment claims. 

What our Biology students are learning

http://staff.science.nus.edu.sg/~sivasothi/biorefugia/2007/04/what-our-biology-students-are-learning.html

What our Biology students are learning

I understand that some of the readers of and contributors to this blog are involved in biology education in Singapore, so I thought it might be interesting to share what biology students are learning now in schools at the A level, in light of the 'life sciences' focus that biology has taken in Singapore. What I'm describing is derived primarily from the biology H2 syllabus as available for download from the MOE website. The following are some key points about the new syllabus that are different from the former one:

1. Biology education from primary school to JC has been reorganised on the following lines: 'How life works at the systems level' for Pri 3-6, the 'physiological level' in secondary school, and 'at the cellular and molecular level' for JC students. The 'systems' level presumably refers to the highest levels of organisation (i.e. from the ecosystem to the population). Quite clearly this scheme seems founded on the premise that fields like ecology and studies of the whole organism are less complex and more easily understood and so are suitable for study by children, but not quite worth the attention of older students.

2. "The H2 syllabus is moving away from the current syllabus model that was based on a 'survey' of topics.' I.e. it is moving away from breadth of coverage to depth of coverage, and the fields that have been picked for in-depth coverage are primarily cellular and molecular.

3. The syllabus is divided into two parts: the Core and Applications syllabuses. The core topics are: (1) Cellular functions, (2) DNA and genomics, (3) Genetics of viruses and bacteria, (4) Organisation and control of prokaryotic and eukaryotic genomes, (5) Genetic basis for Variation, (6) Cellular physiology and Biochemistry, and (7) Diversity and Evolution. The applications are (1) Isolating, cloning, and sequencing DNA, and (2) applications of molecular and cell biology. Furthermore, there is the H3 paper offered by advanced students, possibly the equivalent of the former 'S' paper. However, this paper is devoted entirely to Proteomics, and comprises a mixture of structured and essay questions, where the former S paper was entirely essay-based.

4. The so-called 'cellular physiology and biochemistry' topic actually contains some non-cellular physiology subjects, viz. homeostasis, and nervous and hormonal control. The other subjects are entirely cellular, though, viz. cell signalling, signal transduction, the fluid mosaic model of membrane structure, and the like.

5. 'Diversity' is being taught with three learning outcomes: (i) to explain the binomial nomenclature and hierarchical classification, (ii) to describe the classification of species into taxonomic groups (genus, family... kingdom), and appreciate various species concepts, (iii) to explain the relationship between classification and phylogeny. In short, learning about the theory of classification without reference to any content. On the other hand, the learning outcomes for evolution are fairly conventional.

6. What is not being taught any more: plant transport and animal transport, liver and kidney, all of ecology and environment, the former option topics -- growth, development, and reproduction (imagine a whole generation of male bio students with no knowledge of the menstrual cycle...), biotechnology (much of it is subsumed into the new applications syllabus, however), biodiversity (which was a lost cause from quite a while before; few junior colleges actually taught it).

7. Practical skills are assessed using a system called SPA, which is a form of continual assessment, rather than one practical exam at the A levels. The skills are divided into four phases, A. planning, B. implementation, C. analysis, and D. evaluation. However, savvy students with a knack for seeing through learning objectives and the like can probably figure out what examiners are looking for, to give 'model answers' fairly easily. On the other hand, microscopy is no longer deemed necessary as a skill for biologists (either that or they haven't found a way to assess it yet within the SPA framework) so school microscopes in JCs all over the island are sitting unused and loveless.

The above are my observations. The following are my grouses:

1. Breadth is underrated. My vice principal (I am presently relief-teaching at my former junior college) had an anecdote to share about how breadth of education is important. Readers might remember the Asian Tsunami and how a little girl on holiday saved the life of the people at her hotel because she remembered what were the warning signs of a tsunami from her geography class. She didn't have to know this, it was just introduced for interest's sake but because of this, not only her life but that of everyone else there was saved. Now biology may not be so dramatically life-saving, but certainly breadth of knowledge adds flavour to life and may come in handy. It would certainly be embarassing to call oneself a biology student and yet have little idea about what differentiates a squid from a fish, but just try asking our A level students today. I haven't dared try myself, for fear of what I might hear.

2. If the aim of the syllabus is to prepare A level students for the modern life science economy, then the polytechnics will probably do a better job. I'm not trying to be elitist, nor am I saying that the polys are inferior to junior colleges. My hunch is based on the following points: (i) the poly courses in life sciences cover pretty much the same ground as this bio syllabus, (ii) the poly students have more hands on lab experience with the modern apparatus, while JC students are still stuck doing cucumber strip osmosis and food tests with iodine and Benedict's reagent, (iii) the JC students are not learning a concept of biology broad enough to distinguish them from the poly students. By and large the polys will probably prepare a life science student better than the JCs can.

3. The A levels should be the basis of a general education. The structure of the new A level system as a whole reflects this belief, in that students are required to have one 'contrasting' subject to their other subjects, i.e. a student taking arts subjects must offer one science subject, and vice versa. The biology syllabus in particular, though, is hardly in this spirit. By focussing intently on one area of biology, the new syllabus (i) turns off students who took up biology because of an interest in plants and animals, (ii) prevents them from gaining a broad vision of biology as a unified subject, in which they can put whatever they subsequently learn in university into context, (iii) privileges certain kinds of biology over others. With regards the last point I know that the money is in life sciences, but the privilege I refer to is intellectual privilege. All aspects of biology are equal contributors to our integrative knowledge of it.

4. Overspecialisation in the molecular (or in any subfield of biology for that matter) is ultimately self-defeating. I say this because new discoveries are most frequently made on the basis of integrating knowledge from various disciplines. What is the use of knowing so much detail about plant hormones and signalling in plant cells if one doesn't have any knowledge of plant anatomy and physiology to apply it in? Research questions in molecular biology are also generated from observations at the higher levels of organisation, an important example being the study of genetic diseases, which are physiological and phenotypical manifestations of malfunctions at the genetic level. A biologist with little appreciation for whole-animal physiology, for instance, would have difficulty appreciating pleiotropy and associated concepts.

4. Teachers are told that they should 'relate information on the cellular and molecular level to the systems level.' It is a difficult thing to do. It is an imaginative and courageous teacher who can dredge up a student's long-lost knowledge of the water cycle and pond ecosystem from his primary school days and make a link from there to the molecular and cell biology that he is learning at the moment. It is so much easier not to bother because does the teacher really think it will come out in the exam?

5. Another learning aim of the syllabus is to 'stimulate interest in and care for the local and global environment, and understand the need for conservation.' I don't quite see how the syllabus achieves this.

6. The sciences are treated unfairly in curricular reform, vis-a-vis the arts and humanities. I say this because science education is overhauled with an economic imperative in mind, while the same is not done for arts and humanities subjects like Literature, Music, and Art. We don't see topics like 'Music for the Popular Market' and 'Art of Manga and Anime' being introduced to keep up with new and upcoming trends which seem quite profitable. The reason why Literature isn't discarded as being entirely unimportant to keeping our country's economy purring is because if the syllabus-makers did so, they would be branded as philistines and made a laughing stock. But they are doing something analogous to the sciences and nothing is being said about it. Biology has suffered the most because its coverage, out of all the sciences, is the most broad and modular in nature, so it seems easy to pick and choose only what is the flavour of the day and ignore the rest. In this I think the philosophical biologists have not put enough effort into making a sufficiently persuasive and public case for the integrative unity of biology.

What can be done about this:

1. Partition. Acknowledge that biology is too broad and vast to cover in one syllabus, and petition the MOE to offer two biology syllabuses: one cellular and molecular, the other organismal and integrative.

2. Send indignant letters to the MOE.

3. Continue grassroots efforts to get students interested in biodiversity, ecology, and the like, so that they might consider continuing biology in the university and taking these modules up.

4. Take over the geography syllabus and use physical geography as an avenue to get more coverage of ecology and environmental science in schools.

More suggestions are welcome.

People in the universities need to take the lead in making biology more balanced. Bear this in mind: the students coming out of our junior colleges with their new A levels will be the students going to the universities. Imagine trying to explain something as basic as plant transport, xylem and phloem to a lecture hall of clueless undergrads. Imagine setting an elegant demonstration of fungi growth in the presence of antibiotics only to have students ask if fungi are plants or bacteria. Imagine students who can handle micropipettes but not microscopes (and who blow out all the lamps and crash their 100X lenses into coverslips). Imagine having to explain the four-chambered heart and double circulation to clueless medical undergrads (who would have taken biology to find out it was of little immediate use). Just imagine...

错过入禀诉状六年期限

错过入禀诉状六年期限

男子起诉心理卫生学院非法禁锢被高庭撤销

http://luntan.zaobao.com/archiver/?tid-148277.html

（2011-11-18）

郑靖豫
　　一个男子起诉政府和心理卫生学院非法禁锢他三年多，向它们索偿。不过，基于他错过了入禀诉状的六年期限，所以诉讼被总检察长撤销。

　　谢平祥（译音）声称，有几个警员在2000年11月到他的住家，把他上铐带回警局，同天再送他到心理卫生学院。他被诊断患有妄想型精神分裂症，之后被“扣留”在心理卫生学院至2004年2月。

　　谢平祥认为他被当局非法囚禁，失去了三年三个月的自由。他在去年12月入禀地庭，起诉代表政府的总检察长和心理卫生学院非法囚禁他，要求他们作出赔偿。地庭审理的赔偿额为6万元至25万元。

　　谢平祥指责警方当时没告知他面对什么控状或逮捕他的理由。警员当时疑告诉心理卫生学院，他们怀疑谢平祥精神失常，在后者住家的走廊上逮捕他。

　　不过，总检察长今年6月申请撤销谢平祥的诉讼，获得初庭副主簿批准。谢平祥上诉，被地庭法官陈梅娣驳回。他向高庭上诉，但同样失败。

　　高庭法官吴必理在上个月确认陈梅娣法官的决定。

　　根据陈梅娣法官的判词，总检察长以谢平祥是在提出诉讼的六年时效期限后才入禀法庭为由，要求法庭别受理他的官司。

　　心理卫生学院也通过柯文婷律师提出同样的辩护理由。

　　法官指出，时效法令限定这类官司必须在事发后的六年内提出，即最迟为2006年11月，除非起诉人当时有残疾，才能把诉讼入禀期限延长至他康复后的六年。

法官也说，即使把谢平祥住在心理卫生学院的日子当成他有残疾，他也应在2004年2月出院后的六年内兴起诉讼。换言之，他应在去年2月入禀法庭，但他却迟了八个月才这么做。

　　总检察署昨天受询时透露，据它向警方了解，当年是谢平祥的母亲报警说儿子突然变得暴力和行为古怪。警方于是根据精神失常与治疗法（Mental Disorders and Treatment Act）拘捕他，送去心理卫生学院检查。

　　除非获得法庭批准，否则谢平祥不能再上诉至最高法院上诉庭。吴必理的决定是最终裁决。

曲艺家被误判强奸女演员蒙冤25年 获赔41万元

曲艺家被误判强奸女演员蒙冤25年 获赔41万元(图)

核心提示：1986年12月，中国曲艺家协会甘肃分会会员裴树唐被诬“强奸女演员”被法院判处有期徒刑7年。2011年，当裴树唐拿到无罪判决书时，已是68岁的老人。24年间，裴树唐为证清白不断上访，甚至咬破手指写血书。最终，国家赔偿他刑事赔偿金和精神损害抚慰金41万元。

在人人唾弃的处境中艰难度日，在妻离子散的窘境中求证清白——

“强奸犯蒙冤”25年的辛酸人生

2012年8月9日早晨8时，69岁的裴树唐迈着轻快的步伐直奔凉州区文化馆，行至文化馆楼下，路遇熟人经过，裴树唐微笑点头。迈上文化馆台阶的瞬间，裴树唐心里激动万分，他深呼一口气，对着这幢大楼说：“文化馆！我来报到了！”

裴树唐是轰动全国的武威文化馆干部“强奸女演员”冤案的主人公。他的冤案，他的申诉历程，曾经一度被全国各大媒体争相报道，甚至就连“裴树唐”三个字也成为点击率相当高的百度词条名。

8月9日下午，记者走进裴树唐的家，采访这位蒙冤昭雪、恢复公职的武威名人。

1986年被判为强奸犯时，我42岁。2011年拿到无罪判决书时，我已68岁。

裴树唐住在武威市北关加油站附近的新居巷，这是一排破败的平房，遇到下雨天，狭窄的巷道里泥泞成河。睛天时，巷道里也少有人经过，若非平房里突然传出的狗吠声，人们也许会以为，这里的平房已久久闲置没有人居住。

“1986年12月，我被原武威市人民法院判为强奸罪。7年后出狱，没有了家，没有了住处，多少年来四处流浪，打工打到哪里，就住在哪里。这间10平米的小平房，是6年前，一位好心人借给我的，这也算是我的一个窝，流浪多少年之后居住时间最长的一个窝。”裴树唐讲。

由于小平房突然停电，裴树唐搬了一把小凳子，把记者安置在小院里，他从光线昏暗、只有一台电视(唯一的奢侈品)、一张床的屋内抱出一大堆申诉材料。翻着这些颜色发黄、印有汗渍污渍的申诉材料，裴树唐讲述了从1986年被判处有期徒刑7年到2011年宣判无罪的艰难历程。

翻开一张张判决书，手抚一摞摞申诉材料，裴树唐用颤抖的声音说：“人这一辈子，能有几个春秋？1986年被判为强奸犯时，我42岁。2011年拿到无罪判决书时，我已68岁。中间25年的酸甜苦辣，谁人知晓？”

自1986年到2010年，24年间，他投递出去的申诉材料至少有3007份。

“老裴出狱后，由于没有收入，生活一直非常困难。甚至拾菜叶，捡瓶瓶罐罐维持生活。抽不起香烟，他就抽那种自己卷的旱烟。朋友们去看他，他家里常常捉襟见肘，没有可以下锅的东西。于是朋友们经常送他一些馍、白菜、土豆等帮助他。

他做饭时，从来舍不得倒掉剩饭，他常说这一顿吃不了留着下一顿吃。他是个爱面子的人，从来不让人知道他的狼狈和困难，捡瓶子碰到熟人，他常尴尬地解释，这个瓶子有点用处，想拿回去用。尽管生活困难，但他每次出门时把自己收拾得非常精神。“村上搞文艺演出时，他是导演，老裴是个有长处的人。老裴这一辈子，非常不容易……”原羊下坝生产队书记牛生禄告诉记者。

一位从监狱系统退休的工作人员讲，在7年的监狱生活中，裴树唐始终拒绝认罪，坚持申诉。但与此同时，他又能遵守法律，为其他犯人上文化课，并通过自学取得了海南广播电视大学实用律师学的函授大专班结业证书，数十次受到监狱的表扬和物质嘉奖。尽管表现好，裴树唐却6次拒绝监狱要给他立功和减刑的决定。“我本来就是无罪之人，接受立功和减刑就意味着我已经默认自己有罪。”他说。

尽管处境狼狈，生活困难，但无论在狱中，还是在狱外，裴树唐始终坚持申诉。在监狱里，他不断督促家人到各部门去投递申诉材料。出狱后，他一直奔波在武威、兰州、北京等地不断申诉。根据裴树唐粗略估计，自1986年到2010年，24年间，他投递出去的申诉材料至少有3007份，甚至一些申诉材料，是咬破手指，写的一份份血书。

从1986年起，裴树唐的母亲与他“此生不复相见”、“老死不相往来”。甚至就连母亲去世的消息，裴树唐也是在多年之后才知晓。“裴树唐的妻子跟他离婚后，到现在还是孤身一人生活。彼此之间也没有联系。”裴树唐的老友王先生讲。

裴树唐总结，25年来一直支撑他不断上访，四处去申诉的原因是12个字：“岂能尽遂人意，但求无愧我心！”

这份迟来的冤案判决，让裴树唐历经了漫漫25年。

而究竟是什么原因，促使裴树唐一案，在25年后发生“峰回路转”戏剧性的大改变？

武威法院一位不愿透露姓名的法官讲，裴树唐一案，之所以发生重大改变。缘于主要证据发生重大变化。当年的受害人——被强奸的女演员刘梅(化名)翻供后，变成了该案的重要证人，促使此案发生重大转机。此外，缘于司法进程的不断推进，25年前，案件审理时，法院根据受害人的陈述和一些旁证，就可判定此案。但现在不同，随着司法进程的推进，执法程序更细更严格也更人性化，如果没有足够的证据，便不能随便判定当事人有罪。不能不说，这是法律的进步。

武威市法律界资深人士孙律师剖析，裴树唐一案能够重审，除了受害人刘梅良心发现成为关键证人之外，还缘于当事人裴树唐多年来不断的坚持和申诉。其次，最高人民法院于2011年12月26日、2002年9月10日公布的两个司法解释，对我国的刑事审判监督程序进行了改革和完善，增加了再审的可操作性。武威的裴树唐案、河南的赵作海案和湖北余祥林案，这些冤案的纠正，不但提醒司法机关要严格依法办事，而且要用严格的程序法保障实体法正确实施，尤其在涉及公民个人人身权利的刑事诉讼中，一定要“还无辜者以清白”，做到绝对的司法公正

“冤冤相报何时了，我们都上岁数了，儿孙们还要活人，还有很长的路要走。”

自2010年以后，当裴树唐多年的申诉上访有了结果，最高人民法院指令甘肃高级人民法院再审该案时，全国各地的支持、声援、帮助裴树唐的信件像雪片一般飞到了裴树唐简陋的小平房，甚至还有内蒙古、新疆、深圳的好心人专程跑到武威来探望他。太原市的蒋女士跟裴树唐说：“认识了你，别的忙帮不上，想给你配电脑、手机，这样你申诉打官司就方便多了。”裴树唐婉言谢绝了。北京的张女士亲自跟裴树唐通话，她邀请裴树唐到北京去生活，裴树唐还是谢绝了。过中秋节时，有网友会给裴树唐寄月饼；春节过年，有好心人会邀请裴树唐到他家去过年。甚至当裴树唐坐上公交车时，周围会有人抢着给他买票。

“对于我来说，过去的日子里，在武威这片地方，上无片瓦，下无立锥之地。曾经有一个除夕，当时我坐在文庙状元桥的台阶上，啃着一根冻萝卜度过。那种想家又没有家、想儿女又不敢去看儿女的诸多辛酸，用千言万语难以表述。现在回头再看，还有什么困难不能战胜？更何况我已是年近七旬的老头子。”说着这些，裴树唐潸然泪下。

自2010年以后，当裴树唐多年的申诉上访有了结果，最高人民法院指令甘肃高级人民法院再审该案时，全国各地的支持、声援、帮助裴树唐的信件像雪片一般飞到了裴树唐简陋的小平房，甚至还有内蒙古、新疆、深圳的好心人专程跑到武威来探望他……裴树唐捧出一箱箱书籍和一摞摞来自全国各地的信件。他说，这些都是他的精神动力和人生财富。

而对于当年案件中牵扯的一些人和事，裴树唐豪迈地一挥手，他说：“冤冤相报何时了，我们都上岁数了，儿孙们还要活人，还有很长的路要走。过去的事，就让他过去吧！”提及受害人(后来的证人)刘梅，裴树唐说：“这是个煳涂的女人。人这一辈子，最难得的是说出实话。她既是一个害我的人，同时也是一个受害者。最终，她的良心和实话帮助了我。尤其在2007年，她卖掉了自己的小饭铺，主动跟我一起到北京去上访，这点我感激她。”

“现在，我拿到了国家刑事赔偿金和精神损害抚慰金41万元。8月9日，我已到文化馆报到，以后我的养老保险等问题会得到解决。剩下的日子里，我想为儿女们做些弥补，做些父亲应该做的事。”说到这里，裴树唐的脸上露出慈祥的笑容。这时，院外有孩子跑进来。裴树唐笑着说，现在跟以前不同，邻居的孩子们来往频繁了，这个小院也越来越热闹了。

新闻回放

裴树唐，1944年生，山东省平原县人，原系中国曲艺家协会甘肃分会会员、中国民间文艺研究家协会会员、甘肃群众文化学会会员、武威市文化馆文艺辅导干部。

1986年8月5日15时许，裴树唐作为武威市文化馆文艺辅导干部，召集了部分文艺骨干，在自己的办公室研究安排参加9月份职工业余文艺调演的有关事宜。会后，业余歌手刘梅在秦剧团音乐老师的伴奏下练唱。时至17时许，秦剧团的音乐老师指出，刘应该纠正演唱中存在的吐字归音和气息方法上的错误。于是，裴树唐答应为刘梅进行单独业务辅导。

由于裴与刘专心练唱，不知不觉超过下班时间(18时30分)。双方约定次日上午刘再来接受辅导。出门时正好遇到武某。他是刘梅的未婚夫，前来找刘梅回家吃饭。当时，武某与裴树唐之间发生了口角，争吵之后，武某随之离去。次日上午，刘梅的未婚夫武某又亲自来到文化馆找领导道歉承认错误，希望不要因此事影响到刘梅继续参加文艺活动。9天之后，刘梅却又在未婚夫武某的陪同下以“强奸罪”对裴树唐进行控告。1986年8月30日，裴树唐被逮捕。1986年12月17日，原武威市(今凉州区)人民法院一审判决裴树唐犯强奸罪，判处有期徒刑7年。