Life of Guangzhou - Chinese Man Expected to Appeal against ATM Windfall Sentence of 5 Years

The father of a migrant worker, who was sentenced to five years on Monday for pocketing 175,000 yuan (24,400 U.S. dollars) from a faulty ATM in Guangdong Province, expected his son to appeal against the ruling in a week.

The Intermediate People's Court of Guangzhou convicted Xu Ting of theft and rescinded the previous life sentence. It also fined Xu 20,000 yuan and demanded that he return his windfall to the bank.

The judges reached their verdict taking into account the fact that Xu's theft took place when there was something wrong with the ATM. The crime was not premeditated they said, and Xu did not have as great a malicious intent as he would have had had he premediated the crime, a judge with the court was quoted as saying in an earlier report by Xinhua.

Xu said he would not appeal further, but Xu's father, Xu Cailiang, said his son made the decision because he had no access to the "latest information" outside.

The "latest information" the senior Xu mentioned was that he discovered that 60 percent of netizens held that Xu Ting was not guilty.

"If I accept the ruling, I will let the supporters down," the senior Xu said. "Besides, if Xu Ting doesn't appeal, he will lose his father's face."

According to an online vote carried out on www.nddaily.com, 340out of 436 votes said the five-year sentence was still too severe while 34 votes held the opposite opinion. Another 62 votes said the sentence was appropriate.

But Xu Cailiang argued that it was not that the punishment was severe or not, but that Xu Ting was innocent. "He is too young to know about the law," the father said.

Xu Cailiang expected that his son would appeal in a week.

Xu Ting, a native of Linfen City in northern Shanxi Province, was working as a security guard in April 2006. When drawing cash from an ATM, he realized it only deducted 1 yuan from his account for each 1,000 yuan that he had withdrawn. He mentioned this to a friend surnamed Guo.

Xu subsequently withdrew 175,000 yuan over 171 transactions while Guo took 18,000 yuan.

Guo was jailed for a year after turning himself in. Xu eluded capture for a year before being apprehended and sentenced last year.

The verdict in the 24-year-old Xu's first trial sparked an outcry among the media and legal experts alike, with many saying that he didn't deserve such severe punishment.

State prosecutors insisted on charging Xu with theft from a banking institution, while his lawyers protested that their client was not guilty or at least, had not violated the criminal law.

One of Xu's lawyers, Yang Zhenping, argued that Xu did not actually go into the bank, so he did not steal from a banking institution; he used his real identity to get the money at a public venue, which was not "theft"; and his actions constituted improper gains under the civil law and should not be judged according to the criminal law.

The Intermediate People's Court of Guangzhou was told by the Guangdong Provincial Higher People's Court last month to re-hear the case. It said the November ruling lacked evidence and some facts needed clarification.

A re-trial was held on Feb. 22 at the Intermediate People's Court of Guangzhou when prosecutors insisted on charging Xu with stealing from a bank. His lawyers, however, protested that their client was not guilty.

The court deferred its decision.

[More Guangzhou News]