From the Front Page Sections, translated…
The Drug Dealer, Yo-Shu Chen and Drug Provider, Wen-Shuan Chen had conflicts, in the business of selling illegal substances, four years ago, had someone abduct Wen-Shuan Chen, stuffed him into a gasoline keg, filled up the keg with cement, threw the keg into a pond and disposed of his body, the courts took into considerations how he’d used the Heimlich maneuver to save his cell mate who was choking, believed that he’d not lost his humanity completely, changed his death sentence to life in prison.
The Highest Courts had used this case to debate on the constitutionality of the death penalty, the victim, Chen’s mother heard the verdict, she was very emotional, got down on her knees, pleaded to the judge, “Dear Sir, Do Give Justice Back to Me!”, she’d pointed out, how Yo-Shu Chen never apologized, or paid any money to killing of her son, Wen-Shuan Chen’s wife stated, “A life for a life! He (Yo-Shu Chen) is just too cruel!”
But, the Highest Courts turned Chen’s case back to the appeals courts, and, after the appeals, Chen who was given the death penalty before, the Collectivist Courts pointed out, that in July of 2011, before he’d murdered Chen, he’d found his roommate Yang committed suicide by burning charcoal, he’d rushed Yang to the hospitals, and saved his life; and on top of that, during his time of holding in the Taipei Holding Stations, he saw his roommate, Hong choke on food, and he’d immediately used the Heimlich maneuver to save him, helped Hong spit out the food he was choking on, saved his life, he’d received a certificate of award for his act.
The verdict stated, that all of Chen’s behaviors showed, how he wasn’t without humanity, that using long-term reformation, to make him realize what he’d done, to right his wronged value systems, that he’s still able to be reformed; and, although Shu-Yo Chen used cruel methods to murder his victim, but, his act of malice, compared to the murdered in random shootings, it’d not reached the terms of the ultimate sentence.
In his first trial, Shu-Yo Chen was given the life sentence, in the second trial, the death sentence, it was tossed back by the Highest Courts, and on the appeal of the first trial, Chen received life sentence, and yesterday, the Highest Courts tossed back the appeal by the D.A.
So, because this murderer had two instances where he’d saved someone’s life, so the courts believed, that he wasn’t, without humanity at all, and so, changed his death sentence to life, but, what he’d done to the victim with whom he’d had a disagreement with was, without a doubt, cruel AND unusual, but, because he’d saved two other lives, that, is why he was able to, escape the death penalty, and just because he’d saved two extra lives, that still doesn’t mean, that his GUILTY conscience won’t stop torturing him for murdering the drug dealer with whom he had monetary issues with either, because two rights doesn’t cancel out what he’d already done to the man.