孟晚舟案要反转吗？

hsb

去年底就已经传出米国要孟签认罪协议然后放人回中国的消息，孟没签。
加被扣着的人是绕不过去的，这次判11年就是警告，还有康明凯呢，只会更重。
所以如何体面解套是米、加的问题。

老福

孟晚舟看来真的很冤枉。下面是孟晚舟律师的arguments (链接)。看过这篇报道以后，我觉得有很大可能孟晚舟可以回国了。

孟晚舟在ppt里明确说Skycom对华为而言是“controllable”。既然已经说Skycom was controllable by Huawei, 怎么可能推断出孟晚舟欺骗汇丰呢？

原文：In any event, he said, there was “no deception.” Ms. Meng made clear that Skycom was “controllable” by Huawei. “How could a reasonable inference of intentional deceit regarding ‘control’ be drawn when she disclosed the ‘controllable’ nature of the relationship in the presentation itself?” he asked.

加拿大政府律师一直在说，只有孟晚舟直接告诉汇丰“the two companies were one and the same”才不算欺骗。孟晚舟律师反驳说在法律意义上讲，这两个公司根本不是“one and the same”。作为汇丰这样的跨国银行（经常处理复杂的业务），也不可能会期望听到这种解释。

原文：Frank Addario, who appeared for Ms. Meng after Mr. Gottardi, said Skycom was a partner of Huawei, and Canadian government lawyers were wrong to maintain HSBC needed to hear from Ms. Meng that the two companies were one and the same.

“First of all,” Mr. Addario said, “that is not legal terminology. They’re not one and the same. Sophisticated entities don’t use terms like that. It might suit for a colloquial expression by a lawyer seven years after the fact, or an FBI agent in a ROC [record of the case], but it’s not a substitute for evidence about what a sophisticated multinational bank wanted to know.”

律师进一步阐述：不管华为与Skycom是一家公司还是商业伙伴，与汇丰承受的风险无关。汇丰所需要知道的仅仅是华为和Skycom在伊朗做生意。孟晚舟关于两个公司关系的说法没有升高汇丰的风险。

原文：Whether Huawei and Skycom were effectively the same company or business partners was, in any case, irrelevant to the sanctions risk, Mr. Gottardi said, citing Mr. Bellinger’s affidavit. “All that HSBC needed to know was that Huawei and Skycom were doing business in Iran,” Mr. Gottardi said. “That being the case, nothing said by Ms. Meng about that relationship was capable of giving rise to sanctions risk.”

进一步：华为已经采取措施，确保自己和Skycom遵从禁运令。美国指控文件也没提供任何证据说华为或Skycom违反了禁运令。

原文：And Huawei had taken measures, he said, to ensure its own, and Skycom’s, compliance with sanctions.

“There is simply no evidence to show in the ROCs that either Huawei or Skycom was non-compliant with sanctions,” Mr. Gottardi said. (The ROCs are documents in which the U.S. sets out the allegations and evidence for Canadian authorities.)

最后一击：即使有禁运，有些伊朗生意的仍然可以做（注：美方没有提供证据说华为或Skycom做了被禁止的生意），这一点，孟晚舟没有丝毫隐瞒。唯一可能犯法的是以美元做的交易通过某一银行的美国分支。但是，Skycom的钱的流向是一家中国银行到一家银行的英国分支（即英国汇丰），这一点不犯法。有问题的是汇丰随后把这笔钱流向美国分支，但这不是Skycom违反禁运令，而是汇丰违反禁运令。

原文：Evidence before Associate Chief Justice Holmes over the past two weeks has shown Ms. Meng was candid about doing business in Iran, and that some business in Iran is permissible, despite the sanctions. A sanctions violation may arise, however, when transactions in U.S. dollars are put through a U.S. office of a bank.

The U.S. government, in the case record, points to business dealings between Skycom and a British company, Networkers, which did telecommunications work in Iran for which Skycom paid it millions of dollars. The money was ultimately routed through HSBC in the U.S.

But Mr. Gottardi said Skycom paid the company in U.S. dollars from a Chinese bank, payments that went to HSBC in Britain. HSBC then chose to put the payments through a U.S. bank branch, he said.

It is not a violation of sanctions, Mr. Gottardi said, “to send Iran-related funds to a U.K. bank. That is all that Skycom did with respect to Networkers.” If anyone violated sanctions, he said, it was HSBC.

老福

老福 发表于 2021-8-14 10:41
孟晚舟看来真的很冤枉。下面是孟晚舟律师的arguments (链接)。看过这篇报道以后，我觉得有很大可能孟晚舟可 ...

没有对比就没有伤害。加拿大政府律师的关于孟晚舟fraud汇丰的说法：

Frater accused Meng of making statements to the banker that “went to some length to demonstrate that Huawei had a rigorous approach to sanctions compliance, and that Huawei demanded the same of any partners working in Iran.”

She neglected to tell the banker that Huawei controlled the company, Skycom, that was the subject of HSBC’s concern, he said.
。。。
He said it was clear Ms. Meng had a criminal intent to mislead. “Ms. Meng’s PowerPoint is clearly an artfully prepared script that is generous in its description of sanctions … but economical in its description of the nature of the Huawei-Skycom relationship. This demonstrates that there is a reasonable inference of the deliberate character of the representations.”

“It’s about leaving an impression. And the message was received exactly as it was intended,” Frater said.

史蒂芬周

老福 发表于 2021-8-14 11:40
没有对比就没有伤害。加拿大政府律师的关于孟晚舟fraud汇丰的说法：

Frater accused Meng of making sta ...

这个DA水平不行啊

旺旺的考拉熊

老福 发表于 2021-8-14 11:40
没有对比就没有伤害。加拿大政府律师的关于孟晚舟fraud汇丰的说法：

Frater accused Meng of making sta ...

这个案子没有政治因素在内，早就结束了，但是这么强大的政治因素在这，恐怕真相是什么根本不重要了。

征久仁

旺旺的考拉熊 发表于 2021-8-14 19:51
这个案子没有政治因素在内，早就结束了，但是这么强大的政治因素在这，恐怕真相是什么根本不重要了。 ...

是的，事实就是如此。

老福

旺旺的考拉熊 发表于 2021-8-14 19:51
这个案子没有政治因素在内，早就结束了，但是这么强大的政治因素在这，恐怕真相是什么根本不重要了。 ...

要想给美加解套回归案情本身就是最好的办法，美国加拿大现在其实都想有一个台阶下。

以前只有西方媒体片面的报道，给人的印象似乎就是孟晚舟真的犯了美方指控的罪行。但是，当案件的具体细节披露出来，当人们可以从证据出发独立得出自己的结论，发现孟晚舟并没有欺诈。这个案子非常非常弱，即使引渡成功，我也根本不相信美国能在自己的法庭上赢。

老福

老福 发表于 2021-8-14 10:41
孟晚舟看来真的很冤枉。下面是孟晚舟律师的arguments (链接)。看过这篇报道以后，我觉得有很大可能孟晚舟可 ...

报道的读者意见：

Barbara1945:

1 hour ago
This extradition case by the US is based on such slim grounds it can only be viewed as harassment of Huawei. It was a terrible idea for the US to go after the CFO of Huawei and put Canada in this impossible position. It has caused enormous damage to our economy and to Canadian citizens. It is time for the US to drop its case and get our citizens back to Canada.

It has also caused Meng hardship as she has been unable to travel and is stuck in Vancouver which although she is not suffering must cause her job performance difficulties. It is also an extremely insulting charge to a woman who deserves respect and is highly respected in China. Imagine charging a CFO of any major Canadian or American company on such flimsy charges. Usually in cases like this the company is charged and faces a fine not an officer of the company who could face a fine or imprisonment.

I hope Chief Justice Holmes does the right thing and dismisses the case.

旺旺的考拉熊

老福 发表于 2021-8-14 21:04
要想给美加解套回归案情本身就是最好的办法，美国加拿大现在其实都想有一个台阶下。

以前只有西方媒体片 ...

我认为引渡是肯定会成功的，但是最后案子在美国不会成功。看美国政府对华裔教授和研究人员的控诉案件就有这样的，不过会花想当长时间，而且还是要受政治因素影响。

征久仁

旺旺的考拉熊 发表于 2021-8-15 04:50
我认为引渡是肯定会成功的，但是最后案子在美国不会成功。看美国政府对华裔教授和研究人员的控诉案件就有 ...

办案审案时轰轰烈烈，沸反盈天，达不到目的结案后鸦雀无声。
传统技能了。

老福

旺旺的考拉熊 发表于 2021-8-15 04:50
我认为引渡是肯定会成功的，但是最后案子在美国不会成功。看美国政府对华裔教授和研究人员的控诉案件就有 ...

以前媒体不厌其烦地重复美方指控孟晚舟欺诈，我也确实相信了几分。没想到，当所谓的证据公布出来，结果让人看透了根底。这是典型的恶意诉讼。我相信从法律的角度，孟晚舟有很大的胜诉可能。不了解证据之前，我也有与你类似的看法，但现在我认为孟晚舟获释的可能要大于她被引渡。

旺旺的考拉熊

老福 发表于 2021-8-15 07:39
以前媒体不厌其烦地重复美方指控孟晚舟欺诈，我也确实相信了几分。没想到，当所谓的证据公布出来，结果让 ...

不论在哪里，民意都是很重要的，而真相和证据在政治面前反而没那么重要，不论是媒体，还是加拿大政府已经花了大量的时间定了基调，引导了民意，更何况这只是引渡而不是真的有罪无罪的判决，所以我觉得引渡是极大概率的。当然最终结果会怎样，反正也很快就出来了，我们拭目以待好了

老福

旺旺的考拉熊 发表于 2021-8-15 07:45
不论在哪里，民意都是很重要的，而真相和证据在政治面前反而没那么重要，不论是媒体，还是加拿大政府已经 ...

民意多变，易于操纵。政客阴阳脸根本都不需要酝酿情绪。这些都可做参考，难以当作决定性因素。西方法律系统，其实对富人阶级而言，还是比较可靠的。而孟晚舟就是富人一枚。

估计不会拖很久的。

旺旺的考拉熊

老福 发表于 2021-8-15 07:59
民意多变，易于操纵。政客阴阳脸根本都不需要酝酿情绪。这些都可做参考，难以当作决定性因素。西方法律系 ...

民意易于操纵，但需要时间，不能今天是友，明天就是敌，孟的这个事情已经出了几年了，民意也是花了大量时间设定的，现在再来调头太晚了

至于西方法律系统对富人的可靠，其实不过是有好律师的情况下，对富人的公正，这也是为什么我觉得这个案子最后美国政府是会失败的，但现在不过是个引渡判决，在这么强大的政治因素影响下，我真的很难想象会作出不引渡的判决

semtex

这个投入太多了。 不会放弃的。
阿富汗搞了20年。实在撑不住才走的。

老福

旺旺的考拉熊 发表于 2021-8-15 20:29
民意易于操纵，但需要时间，不能今天是友，明天就是敌，孟的这个事情已经出了几年了，民意也是花了大量时 ...

政治，观察的角度有很多种。我基本是从怎么对拜登团队和特鲁多团队最有利的角度看待这个问题，认为从法律角度解套是最佳出路。美加都极力宣扬自己是rule of law的国家，而左派又最喜欢立牌坊，如果法官宣判孟晚舟不应递解到美国的话，舆论很容易转弯。毕竟以前的民意都建立在舆论宣传煽动的基础上，而不是法律事实的基础上，这种民意很容易消解。

海的故乡

嘉洲 发表于 2021-8-13 13:33
您觉得中国会因为孟晚舟在其他方面让步吗？放孟是双方重回谈判桌的一个前提，即所谓清单列表。如今这世道 ...

只能说明面上不能让步，但是秘密协议里肯定有让步的空间。
不过历来秘密协议都是到死也不会公开的，如何能保证秘密协议的可靠有效，只能靠签订协议双方个人和组织之间的政治互信。拜登这冢中枯骨，有啥信用可言……

四处乱晃

老福 发表于 2021-8-14 21:04
要想给美加解套回归案情本身就是最好的办法，美国加拿大现在其实都想有一个台阶下。

以前只有西方媒体片 ...

本来美国让加拿大做个缓冲，加拿大也可以两头卖号，结果让小土豆操作成绑着石头沉河，中美两边都不好意思伸手往上拉。

老福

老福 发表于 2021-8-14 10:41
孟晚舟看来真的很冤枉。下面是孟晚舟律师的arguments (链接)。看过这篇报道以后，我觉得有很大可能孟晚舟可 ...

最新报道，孟晚舟的律师论证孟晚舟的presentation与汇丰的行为无关。下面黑体一段特别精彩，大意是：（美国指控孟晚舟欺骗汇丰说华为与Skycom没关系导致汇丰乐意与Skycom做生意进而导致触犯美国禁运令的风险）说Skycom与华为无关（注：所谓撒谎的内容）还不如说Skycom是华为的子公司（注：所谓假定不撒谎的话）汇丰更愿意与其做生意。美方的逻辑只有在汇丰更喜欢和与华为无关的第三方做生意而不是直接与华为做生意才成立。而这个假定不成立。

再额外解释一下，如果汇丰因为新闻报道说它正在做生意的Skycom和华为有密切关系（close tie）而产生疑虑的话，它应该去找Skycom要求澄清与华为的关系。汇丰去找华为询问是因为它已经默认华为与Skycom的关系，进而要求华为保证Skycom在伊朗的生意是good business，没有触犯禁运令。孟晚舟就是在给汇丰做这个assurance。如果Skycom在伊朗合法做生意（美方引渡文件没有任何证据说Skycom做了非法生意），汇丰在交易过程中因为美元付款产生的风险与Skycom是独立第三方还是华为的一部分无关，这个风险可以规避，比如采用欧元付款。

原文：
The U.S. alleges that Ms. Meng, the chief financial officer of China’s biggest telecom company, through her lies to HSBC during a PowerPoint presentation in Hong Kong in 2013, exposed the bank to a risk of being punished by the U.S. for violating sanctions on Iran.

“You have to ask what was it that Ms. Meng said that purportedly induced HSBC to violate U.S. sanctions laws,” Mr. Sandler said to Associate Chief Justice Heather Holmes.

。。。


The U.S. charge against Ms. Meng is impossible to understand without some knowledge of U.S. sanctions on Iran. As the Canadian court has heard, some business in Iran is permissible, and Ms. Meng was open about her company, Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd., doing business there. Potential violations arise when U.S. dollars are put through U.S. bank branches in certain business involving Iran.

The U.S. alleges Ms. Meng lied to HSBC about Huawei’s connection to Skycom Tech Co. Ltd. She called Skycom a “controllable” partner; the U.S. says Skycom and Huawei were in fact the same company, and that she minimized Huawei’s control.

。。。

The U.S. alleges that Skycom paid a British company, Networkers, millions of dollars for technology services it provided in Iran. Skycom paid Networkers from a Chinese bank. Networkers was using HSBC in Britain, but the bank put the transaction through a branch in the U.S.

Mr. Sandler stressed that the U.S. had never explained how Ms. Meng’s alleged lies influenced the bank’s decision-making.

Even assuming there had been a misrepresentation, Ms. Meng’s PowerPoint made it no more likely that HSBC would handle the Networkers transaction in the manner it did, Mr. Sandler said.

“There’s no connection between the two. What’s interesting is, it’s actually contraindicated,” he said. “You would have thought there would be more comfort in closing the transaction if you thought Skycom was controlled by Huawei as opposed to this separate uncontrolled entity.”

He said the U.S. had supplied no evidence showing how Ms. Meng’s representations affected the bank’s decisions: “You have to ask yourself, where’s the evidence that they would have acted differently if the misrepresentation had not been made?”

律师推论说孟晚舟的案子在加拿大是史无前例的。

原文：

Lawyers fighting the extradition to the United States of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou said they had looked through every known fraud case in Canadian legal history without finding a single one like hers.

In thousands of fraud cases, the victims have relied on an offender’s deceitful words to make choices that cause themselves harm, or that expose them to the risk of harm, Mark Sandler, a lawyer for Ms. Meng, said in the British Columbia Supreme Court on Monday.

But in Ms. Meng’s case, he said, not only was there no harm, and no real risk of harm, but the prosecution had shown no connection between her alleged misrepresentation and any relevant action by her purported victim: the global bank HSBC.

hsb

看来最终的解套方案就是法庭上的逻辑自洽了。
为什么这个最简单的方法要到最后才用？显然，要等待政治形势的变化。