,
13 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Canadian Robert Schellenberg stood in a Chinese court in a wrinkled white sweatshirt as he was given the death penalty for charges of drug smuggling. The same court sentenced him to 15 yrs in prison just two months ago on nearly the same evidence. wsj.com/articles/chine…
The three judges took one hr to deliberate over 10 hrs of proceedings and supplemental statements. That's not much time to come to a consensus and write up the page-long statement read aloud by the chief judge.
Schellenberg and his former friend Xu Qing each accused the other of buying drug-repacking tools and tires for hiding meth in, and trying to frame the other. Schellenberg said he was tricked into accompanying Xu. Xu said he was Schellenberg's translator.
Prosecutors showed a surveillance footage still of the two buying tools together. (For those curious, drug-repacking tools include: scissors, head lamps, gloves)
The 222kg of meth never left Dalian, as Xu blew the whistle to the cops. He looks to have gained immunity in exchange, though this was not clarified, despite requests from the defense. The warehouse was rented in Xu Qing's name. He wasn't charged.
Little fresh evidence from prosecutors -- unsurprisingly as they had 10 business days to make progress on a 4-yr-old case. Still, they sought to substantiate a new charge against Schellenberg: participating in an international smuggling ring.
The main new evidence was Xu's testimony and a call log from Schellenberg's phone to a man named Mai Qingxiang, who was later sentenced to a suspended death sentence for drug smuggling. Schellenberg said he didn't know Mai, that Xu used his phone to make the call.
Xu's appearance in court was a surprise, as he didn't appear at the first trial or appeal hearing. He was the sole witness. Wore a black puffy coat, and avoided looking at Schellenberg.
Each side spoke a lot. Proceedings lasted some 10 hrs. Observers, many of whom seemed assigned to be in the audience, were slumped in exhaustion in the hard wooden benches. People made frequent trips to the bathroom but always returned.
Despite the dozens of arguments presented by each side, and painstaking cross-examinations, objections, and counter-objections, the decision by the judges was quick and clear-cut. They rejected each of the defense's arguments one by one.
For English-Chinese interpretation, there were two language professors (PhDs) taking turns. We were told it was in response to criticism of the translation last time.
Among foreign media, we were invited along with AFP and 联合早报. Don't know why. Open trials should theoretically be open to everyone.
Tried asking people in the audience where they were from and why they'd come to the trial. Most wouldn't answer. Don't know why. But think if you found your own way there because you were interested in trials, you wouldn't mind saying.
