Society
Panda dairy execs' sentences upheld
By Gao Changxin (China Daily)
Updated: 2010-04-24 06:47
 |
Large Medium Small |
SHANGHAI - A local court on Friday rejected pleas for leniency from two of the three former executives of Shanghai Panda Dairy Co Ltd who were convicted of producing and selling melamine-tainted dairy products.
The Shanghai No 1 Intermediate People's Court upheld the original sentence handed down to Wang Yuechao, former corporate representative and deputy general manager of the company, and Hong Qide, former general manager, last month.
The Shanghai Fengxian District Court had found Wang, Hong and Chen Dehua, former deputy general manager of the dairy manufacturer, guilty of producing and selling toxic food, a charge that has a maximum penalty of death, following a trial in March.
Wang was sentenced to five years in prison and fined 400,000 yuan ($58,800), and Hong was sentenced to four and a half years in prison with a fine of 300,000 yuan.
Chen, who was slapped with a three-year jail term and a fine of 200,000 yuan, did not appeal his sentence.
During the first trial, all three accused pleaded guilty to the charges levied against them.
Friday's verdict is final and cannot be appealed.
The proceedings of the first trial show that from Feb 7 to April 21 last year, Shanghai Panda Dairy produced 6,520 cans of melamine-tainted condensed milk, half of which were sold.
The company recycled previously produced melamine-tainted condensed milk from a company in East China's Fujian province and diluted it to use in its milk products to save money, according to the verdict.
The same industrial chemical was blamed for one of the country's worst food safety scandals in 2008, which killed at least six babies and sickened 300,000.
During the second trial, Wang's lawyer, Tao Wuping, appealed for mitigated sentences, arguing the products caused limited social harm and the company had done melamine tests on some of the milk products before putting them on market, which indicates that they have limited "subjective malice".
But the court refuted the appeal on Friday, saying the evidence justifies their "flagrancy and subjective malice".
China Daily
(China Daily 04/24/2010 page3)
