{"id":"qc80faa67b4abb4fe9cce","batch_id":"batch-000147","seq":122,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-19T19:22:44.769Z","text":"你让机器人找 二巡以前判例是什么","text_en":null,"edited":false,"reply_to":"q1edce51f90b580d65137","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qc80faa67b4abb4fe9cce","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q1edce51f90b580d65137","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言（跨批次）","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000147","batch_canonical_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000147","notice":"围绕郭文贵案的社区讨论与观点交锋。发言仅代表讨论者观点，不等同于法院认定。","content_type":"discussion_message","canonical_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qc80faa67b4abb4fe9cce","markdown_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qc80faa67b4abb4fe9cce/markdown","json_url":"https://mubeitech.com/api/discussion-messages/qc80faa67b4abb4fe9cce","surrounding_messages":[{"id":"qfe97cbc860af13395fa5","speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-19T19:19:03.315Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qfe97cbc860af13395fa5"},{"id":"qee719932b2e96bf8912e","speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-19T19:20:30.930Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qee719932b2e96bf8912e"},{"id":"q1edce51f90b580d65137","speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-19T19:20:57.898Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q1edce51f90b580d65137"},{"id":"q3055a44c69bbcfa60791","speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-19T19:26:11.868Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q3055a44c69bbcfa60791"},{"id":"q9219d8aaa4a4f66f6752","speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-19T19:27:04.484Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q9219d8aaa4a4f66f6752"},{"id":"q667eb65abcdb83ae833e","speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-19T19:31:20.868Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q667eb65abcdb83ae833e"}],"parent_message":{"id":"q1edce51f90b580d65137","speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-19T19:20:57.898Z","text":"对，原则上可以这么理解，但要加一个重要限定：前提是法院对那个问题依法负有“应当行使裁量、作出判断”的义务。\n\n“abuse of discretion（滥用裁量权）”不只包括“法官作出了一个非常不合理的选择”。在上诉法里，它也可以包括：法院本来有裁量权、也应当真正去行使，但实际上没有行使，或者因为错误理解法律而根本没有进行应有的权衡。联邦上诉法院讨论这个问题时，也会先确认下级法院是否真的考虑了与裁量有关的因素。\n\n所以夜月神问的：\n\n“不 exercise 裁量权，是不是就是滥用裁量权？”\n\n更准确的回答是：\n\n可以构成 abuse of discretion。尤其是法院法律上必须 exercise discretion，却因为忽略问题、认为自己无权处理、适用错误标准，或者根本没有进行要求的判断而没有行使裁量时。\n\n但放到 Tony 这个具体问题，不能直接从：\n\n“Torres 没解决我们提出的问题”\n\n跳到：\n\n“所以一定 abuse of discretion。”\n\n中间必须证明一环：\n\n这个资金性质/主权冲突，是 Torres 在量刑或相关终局决定之前依法必须考虑、判断或者 exercise discretion 的 material issue。\n\n如果这一环成立，那么论证链就很漂亮：\n\n存在 material threshold conflict\n→ 法院依法需要判断/权衡\n→ 法院没有真正判断，而直接推进 sentencing\n→ failure to exercise discretion\n→ 可构成 abuse of discretion。\n\n所以你可以直接告诉夜月神一句最准确的话：\n\n“对，法律逻辑上是这个方向：该 exercise 的 discretion 没有 exercise，本身就可以构成 abuse of discretion。现在真正要证明的是，Tony 提出的资金性质和主权冲突属于 Torres 在量刑前依法必须处理或至少必须考虑的事项，而不是一个她可以完全不管的外围问题。”\n\n我觉得他现在明显是在搭这条上诉链，而不是只玩“滥用裁量权”这个词。","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q1edce51f90b580d65137"}}