【新唐人2012年1月19日讯】南京高官日前推翻五年前“彭宇案”的结论，并强调“彭宇案”不是“社会道德滑坡”的反面典型，但民众提出质疑说﹔当局为什么要掩藏真相五年﹔媒体为什么不公开真相﹔彭宇为什么耍了国人五年。
4年多前，南京“彭宇案”引起民众对“跌倒老人是否可以搀扶？”的激烈讨论。当时彭宇自称是见义勇为，搀扶被撞倒的老太太，但是这位老太太却咬定是彭宇将她撞倒，并且向彭宇索赔。双方对簿公堂。
南京鼓楼区人民法院一审判决，彭宇应给付老太太医疗等费用的40%，共4万多元。当时舆论哗然，认为法官惩罚好人。但二审时，双方达成和解而结案。
当时江苏省委书记李源潮在十七大会议上声称，彭宇案和解，“对社会，对各方，对舆论，对将来社会影响，对道德示范都有好处。”但人们都认为“彭宇案”种下了民众不愿做好事，甚至见死不救的祸根。
之后，各地发生了多起老人摔倒无人施救的事件，还有去年10月，“ 18路人漠视”被车撞伤倒在血泊中的2岁女童“小悦悦事件”。每个事件都在拷问中国人“敢不敢扶”。
本周一，《瞭望新闻周刊》发表了一篇题为《南京官方称彭宇承认与当事人发生碰撞赔偿1万》的深度报导，文章中，南京市市政法委书记刘志伟说，“彭宇曾承认确实与老太徐寿兰发生碰撞。舆论和公众认知的‘彭宇案’，其实并非事实真相。”
可是，刘志伟解读的所谓真相并没有得到民众的信任，反而提出许多质疑。《苹果日报》专栏报导指出，南京高官的解释，显然是急于要为李源潮解套，但反而揭开了被掩藏五年的脓疤。
报导说，连《江苏卫视》名主播孟非也公开质疑:“如果这就是真相，为何如此简单的真相直到今天南京官方才肯出来说话?谁又应当为真相不彰造成的恶劣社会影响负责?”
原《河北人民广播电台》编辑朱欣欣向《新唐人》表示，彭宇这个案子开了一个很不好的头，起到了不好的示范。
朱欣欣：“如果法律它在处理一些事情上、纠纷上，如果对坚守道德的人反而造成了一些不利的影响，做好事不得好报，这样无形中就向社会发出这么一个信号，就是说，你选择的这种道德的行为，你付出的代价吧，不能得到法律的保障。”
朱欣欣还表示，中国的媒体和司法部门已经失去了公信力。
朱欣欣：“这么长时间，没有让广大的公众了解真相，这跟中国的新闻媒体没有自由，自主的报导权力有关系，同时司法受到公权的，政治权力的影响和控制完全有关系， 所以说在中国这种官方媒体呀，还有官方这种发言人的这种公信力也特别差。”
而网民也嘲笑说：“如果我是彭宇，我也不忍心看到全国人民因为这个案件不再扶老人，干脆默认南京高官现在的说法。”
新唐人记者常春、朱娣采访报导。
—————
New Judgment on “Peng Yu’s Case”
Recently Nanjing officials overturned a five year old judgment
on “Peng Yu’s case".
It was stated that “Peng Yu’s case" is not a bad example
of “moral degeneration".
However, people questioned: why has the truth been
hidden for five years? Why didn’t media publish the truth?
And why does Peng Yu deceive the public for five years?
Four years ago, “Peng Yu’s case” caused people’s argument on
whether to help an elderly person when they fall to ground?
Peng Yu said he was courageous to help the elderly lady
who fell over.
But the lady claimed that Peng Yu knocked her down,
and asked for compensation, later they went to the court.
The court said Peng Yu should pay 40% of medical expenses,
a total of 40,000 yuan (US$6000).
This led to public outcry that a judge punished a good man.
But after the 2nd court hearing, the two sides reached a
settlement and closed the case.
Li Yuanchao of Jiangsu Provincial Party Secretary
claimed at the 17th National Congress,
“Peng Yu’s case was settled, it is good for society,
for both sides and public opinion as well as social impact.
It is a good demonstration of morality.”
However, people believe, “Peng Yu’s case” warns that the
public should avoid doing good deeds, even neglecting the rescuing of life.
Later, there were some incidents of elderly people falling
over, nobody wants to help.
Last October, a 2-year-old girl Yueyue was hit by a truck,
18 passers-by ignored her and left her lying on the road.
Each incident like this tests Chinese people,
whether to “help or not”.
On Monday, China’s official magazine Outlook Newsweekly
highlighted in an article, “Nanjing official said
Peng Yu admitted he had knocked down the lady and would
pay compensation in the order of 10,000 yuan (US$1600)".
The article quoted the Nanjing ofiicial Liu Zhiwei’s words
“Peng Yu has admitted knocking down Xu Shoulan.
This differs with public opinion and awareness
of ‘Peng Yu’s case’, claiming it is not the truth.”
However, the public didn’t trust Liu Zhiwei’s interpretation
of the so-called “truth”, but raised many questions.
Apple Daily reported that Nanjing officials’ explanations are
obviously eager to keep Li Yuanchao out of trouble.
On the contrary, they exposed the truth that lay
hidden for 5 years.
Reports say that presenter Meng Fei of Jiangsu TV publicly
questioned: “If this is the truth, why wait until today to publish such a simple truth by Nanjing authorities?
Who should be responsible for the bad influence on society? “
Zhu Xinxin, former editor of the Hebei People’s Radio Station
said to NTD that “Peng Yu’s case” created the start of playing bad role models.
Zhu Xinxin: “When the court dealt with some incidents
and disputes, if ethical people were said to have a bad effect,
whilst doing good deeds, this sends a message to society,
that, if you choose this form of moral behavior,
you will pay for it and cannot be protected by law. “
Zhu Xinxin also said that China’s media and the judiciary
have lost their credibility.
Zhu Xinxin: “It took so long before they let the public
learn the truth.
In China media has no freedom of expression and it’s the same
as the judiciary, which are influenced by political power.
China’s official media and official speeches
lack credibility."
The netizens mocked: “If I were Peng Yu, I also could not
bear to let national people not help the elderly people when they fell over due to ‘Peng Yu’s case’.
Just simply accept the explanations from Nanjing officials."
NTD reporters Chang Chun and Zhu Di
