Prosecutors called for strict punishment, saying the academic fraud was “a historically significant case capable of ending a widespread practice where academics manipulate research results with impunity,” despite the fact that there is no precedent of legal punishment for academic fraud. Prosecutors cited the disappointment among the public, for whom Hwang was at one stage a national hero, among aggravating circumstances.

Defense lawyers argued it was wrong to use the law to deal with academic matters. They claimed Hwang did have the basic technology for experiments he failed to perform successfully, adding the prosecution’s focus on a “lapse in the management of research funds” and purchase of human eggs for research was “an attempt to fudge the case and incite public opinion.”

It seems the both prosecution and defense agree the case is without precedent, and the defense uses that as an argument. Perhaps it is relevant that a settlement and perhaps no charges werre filed in the Poehlman case so it doesn’t count as precedent:

Scientists at ORI working with investigators at OIG-HHS and the United States Attorney’s Office then conducted a far-reaching investigation into all of Dr. Poehlman’s grant applications and scientific publications. As a result of this investigation, Dr. Poehlman agreed to enter into the comprehensive criminal, civil, and administrative settlement filed in U.S. District Court today.

Anyway, you would have to get court records and legal opinion on this, and you would be crazy to trust my ‘dubious legal opiniion’. Its interesting to ruminate on these things though.

Prosecutors called for strict punishment, saying the academic fraud was “a historically significant case capable of ending a widespread practice where academics manipulate research results with impunity,” despite the fact that there is no precedent of legal punishment for academic fraud. Prosecutors cited the disappointment among the public, for whom Hwang was at one stage a national hero, among aggravating circumstances.

Defense lawyers argued it was wrong to use the law to deal with academic matters. They claimed Hwang did have the basic technology for experiments he failed to perform successfully, adding the prosecution’s focus on a “lapse in the management of research funds” and purchase of human eggs for research was “an attempt to fudge the case and incite public opinion.”

It seems the both prosecution and defense agree the case is without precedent, and the defense uses that as an argument. Perhaps it is relevant that a settlement and perhaps no charges werre filed in the Poehlman case so it doesn’t count as precedent:

Scientists at ORI working with investigators at OIG-HHS and the United States Attorney’s Office then conducted a far-reaching investigation into all of Dr. Poehlman’s grant applications and scientific publications. As a result of this investigation, Dr. Poehlman agreed to enter into the comprehensive criminal, civil, and administrative settlement filed in U.S. District Court today.

Anyway, you would have to get court records and legal opinion on this, and you would be crazy to trust my ‘dubious legal opiniion’. Its interesting to ruminate on these things though.