噩耗 - 兔军飞碟Juan TANG疑似要被放生 检方已撤告
葱油还记得去年那个从兔国旧金山领事馆被逼出来的解放军军官 UC davis访问学者 - 唐娟吗？
联邦检察官已经正式去文给联邦地区法院法官 dismiss the case
(personal) 有不好的预感 但是办案瑕疵就是瑕疵
https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article251976218.html
Did the FBI go too far questioning Chinese researchers without reading them their rights?
https://www.kansascity.com/news/nation-world/national/article252968268.html
US seeks to drop Chinese researcher’s visa fraud case
摘录几段重要报道
The motion filed in federal court in Sacramento asks U.S. District Judge John A. Mendez to dismiss the remaining count against Dr. Juan Tang, a prominent cancer researcher who came to the United States in December 2019 to conduct research at UC Davis.
Her trial was set to begin Monday on a charge of lying on her visa application about whether she had been a member of the Chinese military. Mendez previously had dismissed a separate count charging her with lying to the FBI because agents violate her Miranda rights by not advising her that she did not have to answer their questions.
The motion by Assistant U.S. Attorney Heiko Coppola gave no reason for seeking the dismissal, and acting U.S. Attorney Phillip Talbert declined to comment.
Tang’s lawyers have argued that photos of her wearing a military-style uniform that investigators found on the internet did not indicate she was actually a member of the Chinese military.
And, they noted, the charge of lying on her visa application likely would have resulted in a six-month sentence at most, less than the 10 months she spent in the jail and at the Bay Area home under house arrest.
---下面有一个葱油的回复解答比较详细 作为参考---
pin @woshi114514
联邦检察官已经正式去文给联邦地区法院法官 dismiss the case
(personal) 有不好的预感 但是办案瑕疵就是瑕疵
https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article251976218.html
Did the FBI go too far questioning Chinese researchers without reading them their rights?
https://www.kansascity.com/news/nation-world/national/article252968268.html
US seeks to drop Chinese researcher’s visa fraud case
摘录几段重要报道
The motion filed in federal court in Sacramento asks U.S. District Judge John A. Mendez to dismiss the remaining count against Dr. Juan Tang, a prominent cancer researcher who came to the United States in December 2019 to conduct research at UC Davis.
Her trial was set to begin Monday on a charge of lying on her visa application about whether she had been a member of the Chinese military. Mendez previously had dismissed a separate count charging her with lying to the FBI because agents violate her Miranda rights by not advising her that she did not have to answer their questions.
The motion by Assistant U.S. Attorney Heiko Coppola gave no reason for seeking the dismissal, and acting U.S. Attorney Phillip Talbert declined to comment.
Tang’s lawyers have argued that photos of her wearing a military-style uniform that investigators found on the internet did not indicate she was actually a member of the Chinese military.
And, they noted, the charge of lying on her visa application likely would have resulted in a six-month sentence at most, less than the 10 months she spent in the jail and at the Bay Area home under house arrest.
---下面有一个葱油的回复解答比较详细 作为参考---
pin @woshi114514
25 个评论
但凡这帮记者有一点时间去翻下卷宗，都不会搞出这么草的报道。撤诉是完全有迹可循的，合理的行为，主要是考虑到这个案子继续往下推不可能向着检方希望的方向发展。我们不妨看一下这个案子的关键点：
这个要Dismissal的Assistant U.S. Attorney Heiko Coppola是谁？如果翻了trial brief，你就能在 TRIAL BRIEF by USA as to Tang Juan. (Coppola, Heiko) (Entered: 07/19/2021) 的文件底部找到他的签名。
那这份文件又说了什么呢？USA一侧的trial brief主要重申了一遍证据。有意思的是，在part IV. I. Exclusion of Certain Testimony中，他希望exclude一份FBI报告（https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.caed.377002/gov.uscourts.caed.377002.195.1.pdf），这份报告对USA一方来说是极大的不利证据。 引用Juan Tang方的court brief，它的核心是：
同时，这份文件还把最大的，可以当作量刑标准的技术窃取问题否定了。
这份FBI文件确实是个大问题，它直接把visa fraud中谎报military affiliate的指控推到了DS-160表格的陈述问题上面，同时否认了检方提供的军服照作为证据。如果USA方不能exclude这个证据，很难说这个案子会被判有罪，而且因为报告强调了政府过失和证据的不充分，同时否定了技术窃取动机和可能，就算判了有罪也不可能重判，这就是最后一段认为刑期最多只有六个月的说法的由来。
那为什么在这个案子之外，同时要drop五个案子呢？
因为这份FBI文件同时提了这五个案子！在TANG_00002995到TANG_00002997，这份文件详细的阐述了Wang Xin案，一个未指名的BU访问学者案，Juan Tang案，一个未指名的Indiana University of Bloomington访问学者案，一个未指名的Stanford访问学者案，和一个未指名的UCLA访问学者案。这份文件是FBI对这六起案件的集中调查。这份文件不仅能在Juan Tang案上对付检方的指控，也可以用在另外5个案子上。这下检方在每一个案子上都非常被动了。
卷宗记录： https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17422518/united-states-v-juan/
重点在底部7月19号的两份Trial brief和补充的FBI文件证据。
什么叫司法独立啊，这就是司法独立。
这个要Dismissal的Assistant U.S. Attorney Heiko Coppola是谁？如果翻了trial brief，你就能在 TRIAL BRIEF by USA as to Tang Juan. (Coppola, Heiko) (Entered: 07/19/2021) 的文件底部找到他的签名。
那这份文件又说了什么呢？USA一侧的trial brief主要重申了一遍证据。有意思的是，在part IV. I. Exclusion of Certain Testimony中，他希望exclude一份FBI报告（https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.caed.377002/gov.uscourts.caed.377002.195.1.pdf），这份报告对USA一方来说是极大的不利证据。 引用Juan Tang方的court brief，它的核心是：
“individuals as well as PLA experts interviewed in the cases cited above
suggest that the visa application form (DS-160) potentially lacks clarity when it
comes to declaring one's military service or affiliation. China's PLA is not a direct
analog to how the US military services are set up, especially regarding the PLA's
Civilian Cadre....Among the Civilian Cadre are a significant number of doctors
and nurses and other professionals that at times are required to wear a military
type uniform, but who would not necessarily consider themselves soldiers despite
being considered as active duty.” Exh. A at 2997. (Emphasis added.)
同时，这份文件还把最大的，可以当作量刑标准的技术窃取问题否定了。
3. █ what are 1-2 key takeaways from this place for FBI field offices?
██ Individuals from the PRC seeking visas may obfuscate institutional relationships that could slow their application or cause it to be rejected; however, available reporting does not support the assumption that this is an indicator of planned tecnology transfer. As researchers seeking visas adjust to the law enforcement activities and policy changes of the past year, including these arrests and interviews as well as the PRC student visa proclamation of May 2020, field offices should be alert for any change in reporting that would suggest researchers targeting critical technology are using obfuscation to obtain visas in spite of their affiliation with a prohibited institution.
这份FBI文件确实是个大问题，它直接把visa fraud中谎报military affiliate的指控推到了DS-160表格的陈述问题上面，同时否认了检方提供的军服照作为证据。如果USA方不能exclude这个证据，很难说这个案子会被判有罪，而且因为报告强调了政府过失和证据的不充分，同时否定了技术窃取动机和可能，就算判了有罪也不可能重判，这就是最后一段认为刑期最多只有六个月的说法的由来。
那为什么在这个案子之外，同时要drop五个案子呢？
因为这份FBI文件同时提了这五个案子！在TANG_00002995到TANG_00002997，这份文件详细的阐述了Wang Xin案，一个未指名的BU访问学者案，Juan Tang案，一个未指名的Indiana University of Bloomington访问学者案，一个未指名的Stanford访问学者案，和一个未指名的UCLA访问学者案。这份文件是FBI对这六起案件的集中调查。这份文件不仅能在Juan Tang案上对付检方的指控，也可以用在另外5个案子上。这下检方在每一个案子上都非常被动了。
卷宗记录： https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17422518/united-states-v-juan/
重点在底部7月19号的两份Trial brief和补充的FBI文件证据。
什么叫司法独立啊，这就是司法独立。