{"id":"qdfc6b28f5c4af197e8be","batch_id":"batch-000149","seq":136,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-21T02:45:40.906Z","text":"这个里面，关于没收，郭的律师，显然没有做好。王的律师，也是一样。\n似乎律师都不敢碰这个，他们当然懂restitution forfriture的区别，但不说，怕挡了检方的财路","text_en":null,"edited":false,"reply_to":"q026c167e2d8610285f60","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qdfc6b28f5c4af197e8be","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q026c167e2d8610285f60","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言（跨批次）","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000149","batch_canonical_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000149","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/qdfc6b28f5c4af197e8be","markdown_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qdfc6b28f5c4af197e8be/markdown","json_url":"https://mubeitech.com/api/discussion-messages/qdfc6b28f5c4af197e8be","surrounding_messages":[{"id":"qacb8fe5bc6044c6b64df","speaker":"chu***","date":"2026-08-20T23:21:07.172Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qacb8fe5bc6044c6b64df"},{"id":"qbfd57dce33636d7d5643","speaker":"chu***","date":"2026-08-20T23:36:06.818Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qbfd57dce33636d7d5643"},{"id":"q026c167e2d8610285f60","speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-20T23:54:34.050Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q026c167e2d8610285f60"},{"id":"q33492ec49ec7dd801330","speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-21T02:55:26.121Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q33492ec49ec7dd801330"},{"id":"qee4e6023a1d59ce72782","speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-21T02:56:15.009Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qee4e6023a1d59ce72782"},{"id":"q8ce28c75b467185cec07","speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-21T03:06:56.592Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q8ce28c75b467185cec07"}],"parent_message":{"id":"q026c167e2d8610285f60","speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-20T23:54:34.050Z","text":"在初步没收令720被批准之前，被告说他在被没收特定财产里没有个人利益。这说的是事实，因为那些财产要么是家人的，要么是投资者的。然后，这句话在接下来每次被告就没收相关提出主张时，政府就用来反驳，说被告自己都承认没有个人利益，所以无权有任何主张。政府在引用这段话时，前提必须是它认同，政府不能用自己不认同的事实去主张法院驳回被告主张。所以这里的矛盾显而易见，政府既然认为被告在那些特定财产上没有个人利益，那么对个人资产没收令里，就不应该计入那些财产，你可以把8.89亿的金钱判决给到郭，但那些特定财产不能被没收，因为你政府自己认同被告对这些特定财产没有个人利益这一主张，政府认同的事实与它的没收那些特定财产的实力行动完全对立。这种操作是否也表面合法？认为我似乎也没有看到被告律师用这个论点来就没收发表异议？然后托雷斯在858里，把G enterprise 里的投资项目里除掉gtv部分的财产，因为郭被定罪rico共谋以及王雁平指任郭是boss，认定为是郭的通过犯罪行为取得的个人财产，没收清单里的相关银行账户里的钱，就是这些财产的一部分。也就是政府表达前后完全对立的主张，法官都采信，法官在判词里，我也没有看到她圆这一点。","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q026c167e2d8610285f60"}}