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.

  • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    101
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    18 days ago

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

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      17 days ago

      I don’t care for billionaires or the death sentence.

      If we revised the system I could be okay with the death sentence in some situations but the way it is now makes absolutely no sense.

      • makyo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        17 days ago

        I am against the death penalty and would only give it consideration in the case of billionaires

        • sudo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          17 days ago

          I don’t trust the state to ever decide whether someone deserves to live or die.

          Some vigilantes on the other hand…

        • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          17 days ago

          Meh, I am more lax with life. I think it can easily be done more humane and much cheaper. Shit for a while there I remember reports that the drugs we used weren’t allowed to be used to euthanize pets because they were to inhumane. That said, I think anyone who gets a long sentencing should be allowed the choice. 15 years, or you chose to live 1 year in prison and then if you still agree a year later a mask with carbon monoxide would be fine for me.

          We always worry we are killing innocent people, and innocent people will die this way as well, it at least was their choice though. If you do it in a decent way… Instead of it costing far more than life in prison does already right now, it could be beneficial to some people.

          Then again I also think assisted suicide should be legal as well. Same sort of idea. Choice to check into a facility or live in normal life, with a set year of discussion with a therapist and at the end of that year if you still wish to be done, your done.

          Or even just a sedative to knock you unconscious like at the oral surgeon, then put the mask on the person for 30 mins. They wouldn’t feel a thing and it would be cheap.

          • makyo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            17 days ago

            I’m 100% for assisted suicide. I don’t think anyone should have the say except the individual. I’d be happy with the plan you laid out, seems reasonable for everyone.

            As far as using it as a penalty there are two reasons I’m against it:

            1. I want it to slowly eat at them that they were afforded a mercy that they didn’t afford others.
            2. I want to see to it that they live long enough to fully understand the pain and misery they caused

            I honestly wish it was possible to exend a convict’s life as long as possible to see that they really do understand and finally feel the shame of their actions.

            • ContriteErudite@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              17 days ago

              The purpose of prison ought to be reconciliation and rehabilitation, not revenge or forced contrition. Many prisoners do feel remorse for their crimes, but unfortunately recidivism is so high (in America) because our socioeconomic and judicial systems are tooled to undermine a parolee’s attempts to reintegrate into society, setting them up for failure.

              Only in extreme circumstances, i.e. truly sociopathic criminals, should sentences that remove all hope of reintegration or release be issued. True sociopaths are incapable of feeling remorse, no matter how long or under whatever conditions they are kept. They do understand the weight and impact their crimes had on their victims, but they do not care. No amount of coercion will change that. In these fringe cases, I’d argue that giving them the choice between lifelong sequestration or self-inflicted suicide is ostensibly the best solution for everyone.

              • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                edit-2
                17 days ago

                Sociopathic criminals aren’t to blame for how they are. They aren’t really in a position to change themselves nor have they decided to be this way.

                Therefore the only punishment should be taking away their ability to harm others by limiting their freedom.

                But if this is the sole punishment, I think hardly any would choose death. Why would they, if they could live a comfortable yet supervised and limited life? Key point is comfortable. That’s not what the vast majority of prisons are today which means allowing them to choose suicide is more or less a coerced death penalty if we’d just slap it onto the current system.