【新唐人2012年1月19日訊】南京高官日前推翻五年前「彭宇案」的結論，並強調「彭宇案」不是「社會道德滑坡」的反面典型，但民眾提出質疑說﹔當局為甚麼要掩藏真相五年﹔媒體為甚麼不公開真相﹔彭宇為甚麼耍了國人五年。
4年多前，南京「彭宇案」引起民眾對「跌倒老人是否可以攙扶？」的激烈討論。當時彭宇自稱是見義勇為，攙扶被撞倒的老太太，但是這位老太太卻咬定是彭宇將她撞倒，並且向彭宇索賠。雙方對簿公堂。
南京鼓樓區人民法院一審判決，彭宇應給付老太太醫療等費用的40%，共4萬多元。當時輿論譁然，認為法官懲罰好人。但二審時，雙方達成和解而結案。
當時江蘇省委書記李源潮在十七大會議上聲稱，彭宇案和解，「對社會，對各方，對輿論，對將來社會影響，對道德示範都有好處。」但人們都認為「彭宇案」種下了民眾不願做好事，甚至見死不救的禍根。
之後，各地發生了多起老人摔倒無人施救的事件，還有去年10月，「 18路人漠視」被車撞傷倒在血泊中的2歲女童「小悅悅事件」。每個事件都在拷問中國人「敢不敢扶」。
本週一，《瞭望新聞週刊》發表了一篇題為《南京官方稱彭宇承認與當事人發生碰撞賠償1萬》的深度報導，文章中，南京市市政法委書記劉志偉說，「彭宇曾承認確實與老太徐壽蘭發生碰撞。輿論和公眾認知的『彭宇案』，其實並非事實真相。」
可是，劉志偉解讀的所謂真相並沒有得到民眾的信任，反而提出許多質疑。《蘋果日報》專欄報導指出，南京高官的解釋，顯然是急於要為李源潮解套，但反而揭開了被掩藏五年的膿疤。
報導說，連《江蘇衞視》名主播孟非也公開質疑:「如果這就是真相，為何如此簡單的真相直到今天南京官方纔肯出來說話?誰又應當為真相不彰造成的惡劣社會影響負責?」
原《河北人民廣播電臺》編輯朱欣欣向《新唐人》表示，彭宇這個案子開了一個很不好的頭，起到了不好的示範。
朱欣欣：「如果法律它在處理一些事情上、糾紛上，如果對堅守道德的人反而造成了一些不利的影響，做好事不得好報，這樣無形中就向社會發出這麼一個信號，就是說，你選擇的這種道德的行為，你付出的代價吧，不能得到法律的保障。」
朱欣欣還表示，中國的媒體和司法部門已經失去了公信力。
朱欣欣：「這麼長時間，沒有讓廣大的公眾了解真相，這跟中國的新聞媒體沒有自由，自主的報導權力有關係，同時司法受到公權的，政治權力的影響和控制完全有關係， 所以說在中國這種官方媒體呀，還有官方這種發言人的這種公信力也特別差。」
而網民也嘲笑說：「如果我是彭宇，我也不忍心看到全國人民因為這個案件不再扶老人，乾脆默認南京高官現在的說法。」
新唐人記者常春、朱娣採訪報導。
—————
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