Cold-blooded crime record: Sydney, Australia, Sexually assaults niece and kills family to take over heritage (3) Royal prosecutors said that when Lin Ye spoke to the 000 operator, she had a loud argument with Xie Lianbin. She told her husband that she was scared and told him not to leave her until the police arrived. Xie Lianbin left her there and went home to pick up the car to pick up her parents. Lin Ye told the court that she told Xie Lianbin to drive to Malilan to pick up her parents and let them know the news as soon as possible. On June 22, 2015, Lin Ye continued to testify in court. She was concerned that the police falsified the evidence to frame her husband, and hoped that the third party agency would detect the physical evidence. On July 9, 2015, Senior Royal Prosecutor Tedsch, alluding to Lin Ye's intention to lie in court to protect his husband, Lin Ye denied. The couple lived near Lin's house, Lin Ye told the court that Xie Lianbin did not go out on the night of the incident. Lin Ye said she was a light sleeper, and her husband got up in the toilet, and she would know that she slept well that night, she believe Xie Lianbin was always around. Tedsch told Lin Ye that the monitoring device installed in her home recorded that night with her husband to discuss the questions the police had asked her during the day. Tedsch pointed out that she mentioned a number of things in the dialogue, including "how do I know if you went for a walk outside?" and "how do I remember if I woke up?" Tedsch asked, "Do you mean that, did you not answer the question of the police, did you wake up because you were not sure whether Xie Lianbin went out?" Lin Ye replied, "No." Lin Ye said that they were talking about the general situation, not the night of the murder, and that the police tried to frame them. She said that she was worried about the police's investigation methods and that what was told to them would be distorted. On July 20, 2015, the former inmate (Mr. A) of the defendant Xie Lianbin testified in the High Court that he received AU $ 4910 and commutation of other crimes during his cooperation with the police. Mr. A said in court that after Xie Lianbin was arrested in 2011, they were "neighbors" in Sydney's Long Bay Prison. Xie Lianbin was very lonely at the beginning and had little interaction with other prisoners. Once, a prison table tennis match was held in prison. Xie Lianbin and Witness A won a great victory. The two became friends. Witness A told the jury: "This relationship has developed to the point where we can talk every day." In December 2011, after Xie Lianbin failed to apply for bail, Witness A saw a news report on the case in prison. Soon after, the two talked about Xie Lianbin being monitored and photographed to cut the shoe box. Xie Lianbin told Witness A: "I will use a shoebox to hold money. All Chinese people do this." On one occasion, Witness A asked Xie Lianbin, and his wife said that there would be no problem with him when she shared the same bed with him that night. Xie Lianbin said, "No, there will be no problem ... mild sedation, the wife must support her husband instead of her family, that is our culture." Xie Lianbin once talked about how to use the dead man's top bag to murder, including "candidates" who want to kill, "we have planned some specific matters." Mr. A used a recording device to record the conversation with Xie Lianbin and gave it to the police. Mr. A told the jury that the police instructed him to cover Xie Lianbin, including a proposal to extract DNA from a corpse and transfer it to the murder weapon. Mr. A said that the police were trying to seduce Xie Lianbin to reveal the whereabouts of the weapon, which was as "magic" as Stephen King's novel. Later, the plan evolved into finding someone who had just died, and he was the murderer. Xie Lianbin said that this person must be of certain age and cannot be detained at the time of the murder. He has no family members and his name is preferably "Rob." "Rob" is the English name and nickname of Xie Lianbin. Xie Lianbin's lawyer questioned the credibility of the recordings of these conversations, and the lawyer alleged that he violated Xie Lianbin's right to silence. He claimed that if he knew that Harris was a detective, Xie Lianbin would not meet with him and demanded that the recorded evidence could not be presented. The judge ultimately refused to submit the recorded evidence to a jury. On September 15, 2015, the jury has been hearing for seven months. The defense has always pointed out that the police have no key evidence. This is the fourth trial of the case. The previous two trials were suspended and one trial failed to reach a consensus decision. Senior Royal Prosecutor Tedsch began his closing statement to the jury. Tedsch told Xie Lianbin: "You might think this day will not come." Tedsch said that the first issue to be discussed in the casewas the crime scene and the killer information revealed in it. No matter who killed the five people, he could hack into the house and move freely. The prosecutor stated in the court that Xie Lianbin's motives for committing the crime stated that he committed the crime because he was "low-ranking" in his family and was jealous of his grandmother. Prosecutors pointed out that Xie Lianbin had proposed adopting a niece a few hours after the crime, which was unusual. Xie Lianbin hoped that after the death of Lin Ling , he and his wife would take Lin Su, a 15-year-old niece, to his house to satisfy his beastly desiresand seize his inheritance. The prosecution alleged that Xie Lianbin was carrying "hammer-like weapons" at that time and had great lethality. He first slept Lin Ling and Lin Yunli while sleeping, and then entered the second room to kill Lin Yunbin. Lin Ye was controversial when she gave evidence in court. Sometimes the judge asked her to raise her voice, and sometimes she forgot part of the incident and asked to adjourn to appear on the grounds of seeing a doctor. Lin Ye said in court that Xie Lianbin was in bed at home the night of the murder, but she did not remember whether she had woke up that night. The main controller said that after receiving the question from the police, Lin Ye told Xie Lianbin the details of the bloodshoe print on the scene of the murder. The lawyer said that Xie Lianbin got along well with Lin Ling's family, especially Lin Ling's youngest son Lin Tao, who could not kill them. On September 22, 2015, Xie Lianbin's defense lawyer Tan Bao made a closing statement, pointing out a series of "significant features" against Xie Lianbin, including the fact that Lin Ling's house was not forcibly broken in. Blood stains matching the deceased's DNA. Tan Bao reminded the jury: "The fate of this man is in your hands. You have to decide if there is sufficient evidence to convict him on five counts of murder." November 27, 2015. The jury announced that after ten days of negotiation, no consensus could be reached. Judge Fullerton said after receiving notifications of progress from 12 jurors: "I know you have been cautiously discussing for ten consecutive days. There is no time limit for reaching an agreement. After determining that it is really impossible to reach a consensus, will dissolve you.I know you will do your best to fulfill your obligations.Calm and objective discussions usually lead to better understanding. " On December 8, the jury failed to convict him, and Judge Fullerton of the NSW High Court approved Xie Lianbin's bail application. He has been in jail for four years and seven months. This is the largest criminal case ever spent in New South Wales, Australia, against a single defendant, with 160 days before and after the evidence hearing. Trial funding up to the third judgment on December 1, 2015, cost a total of $ 1 million. The jury was unable to obtain a consensus and determined that Xie Lianbin was the murderer of the five Lin family members. On June 24, 2016, the jury was informed that after the murder, Lin Ye was called several times to participate in a secret hearing of the crime committee until her husband Xie Lianbin was arrested in May 2011. Shortly after one of the hearings, a recording device installed in Xie Lianbin's home recorded Xie Lianbin's shredded shoe boxes and flushed them into the toilet. On June 29, the blood-washed Lin family murder case, the fourth trial in the NSW High Court. In her opening statement, Crown Prosecutor Smith noted that evidence showed that the murder, which occurred seven years ago, had only one murderer. On September 8, Lin Ye told the jury that she and her husband, Xie Lianbin, arrived at his brother's house on July 18 because his brother did not appear in the newspaper and magazine shop he runs on time. Lin Ye said, "When I entered the unlocked house and did not see anyone downstairs, my emotions broke down many times. I kept walking and yelling, but no one answered." Lin Ye said that her husband followed her upstairs, and she saw that the door of the master's room was open, the room was dark, and the curtains had not been opened. The husband stood beside her and told her not to look, then hugged her tightly. Lin Ye said, "I have all seen that Lin Yunli's entire face has changed and there is blood." Prosecutor Smith pointed out that Lin Ye had been questioned by the police a few days after the incident and twice said that her husband was behind her at the time and she did not see anything in the room. Her husband told her not to look and then hugged her. She later turned and saw Lin Yunli and blood. Lin Ye told the jury again that when her husband was hugging her, she had seen the scene on the bed. Smith said that Xie Lianbin did not let his wife see, but knew that there was a body because he was the murderer. Smith claimed that Lin Ye's testimony was unreliable, and Lin Ye said that it was due to limited English ability when interviewed by the police. Smith said that Xie Lianbin's pair of sneakers matched the shoe marks obtained from the blood on the Lin's bedroom. "A trusted family member killed his family in the most cruel way," Smith said.

Cold-blooded crime record: Sydney, Australia, Sexually assaults niece and kills family to seize inheritance (4) On October 18, 2016, the Lin family's bloody case was reopened for trial. During the four trials of the Lin family's bloody case, relatives of the Lin family who could not disclose their identity due to legal reasons, issued a victim impact statement under the code of Miss AB, mentioning the case against him cause a nightmare effect. The testimony of Miss AB became the key to deciding Xie Lianbin's guilty. She said: "The language is not enough to describe the pain and injury to me and those around me." "I don't know how to express the impact of the murder of my dear relative on my life. There is no word to describe the pain and suffering that this brings to me." "It completely changed my life. If this case didn't happen, I don't think any part of my life would be the same as it is now." "Before I left home, I didn't say anything to my dad. I just stood there awkwardly, thinking," I'll only go there for a week anyway, and I will see them soon. "Today, my last regret is that I didn't give my dad a Hug, didn't tell him I love him, didn't thank him for loving me so much. " "Without love, pain will never disappear, and time will not erase the pain." "It has been seven and a half years since I lost my family. This is seven and a half years without loving my mother. This is seven and a half years without loving my father." "With the passage of time, others may forget, but I will spend the rest of my life on the crimes committed by others." The testimony of Miss AB was accepted by the Justice, proving that Xie Lianbin's crime was sexually motivated. On November 18, 2016, five months after the trial of the Lin family's bloody trial, the prosecution entered the stage of concluding the case, describing the Lin family's bloody case as "meticulous planning" and "single person completion". The murderer clearly understood the interior layout of the house. "The case is by no means a random attack, not a manslaughter caused by robbery, theft or assault," said Royal Prosecutor Smith. Smith said that the deceased were all Xie Lianbin's in-laws. There was no indication that the house had been forcibly broken into, and the murderer opened the door directly with a key. On November 24, 2016, the prosecution and the defence opposed the evidence. Prosecutors said that when Xie Lianbin and Lin Lin Yeentered the master room, the body could not be seen at his location, but he hugged his wife and asked her not to show it,indicating that he had known five murders and he was the murderer. Xie Lianbin's defense lawyer, Weber, said: "Xie Lianbin is much taller than Lin Lin, who is petite. He may look over the wife's head or see the scene in the bedroom from the surroundings. He may see those things clearly, in fact he does. " Prosecutors pointed out that Xie Lianbin was a physician. He did not take the pulse of the five victims and checked whether they were still alive. Lawyer Weber told the jury: "You have seen pictures of the corpses on the scene and they do not look like they are alive. No doubt they are dead. " Weber lawyers said the prosecution's claims that Xie Lianbin left his frightened wife alone at the scene in order to process evidence, such as a hammer-like weapon, were speculation. Xie Lianbin left to pick up Lin Ye's parents and take them to the Lin family. Xie Lianbin originally invited them to come by train and only drove to pick up at Lin Ye's request. "It's because he didn't murder anyone, he didn't have a weapon, no weapon or anything like that, and everything that happened that morning was innocent," Lawyer Weber said. The lawyer said that Xie Lianbin was thin and could not kill five people in a short time. The weapon that killed the five members of the Lin familyhad never been found. Xie Lianbin never pleaded guilty and said he was innocent. On December 11, 2016, a jury of eight men and four women participated in the trial for nearly a month and was unable to reach a consensus or majority consent. On December 28, Justice Fullerton continued to guide the jury, summarizing all the evidence presented in court, before the jury left in the afternoon. The judge told the jury on the afternoon of the 29th thathe may withdraw from the court to discuss the ruling. At that time, the jury will consist of four women and nine men, and the judge said that one member will be eliminated before leaving the court. Fullerton said: "The trial is long, and I expect it to end tomorrow (29th), and you can leave the court to discuss in the afternoon." She thanked the jury for returning to the court after the Christmas holiday and understood that "it's difficult to be in court." Lin Yangfei and his wife determined that Xie Lianbin, the son-in-law, had killed his son's family. A senior royal prosecutor sat next to Lin's parents, Lin Yangfei and Zhu Fengqin, who cried all the time. On December 29, the jury was unable to reach a consensus ruling, and Judge Fullerton requested the jury to return to court on January 12, 2017. On January 12, 2017, after eight days of deliberations, the 12-person jury failed to reach an agreement, and finally Xie Lianbin was convicted of five murders at 11: 1. The state of New South Wales, Australia, allows the court to adopt an 11: 1 majority decision or a 10: 1 or 9: 2 majority decision with a small number of juries, and the judges sentence the sentence. The trial of the Lin family's blood trial lasted seven and a half years. After four juries, the first two juries terminated halfway. The third jury was inconclusive. The fourth jury finally convicted Xie Lianbin. Xie Lianbin insisted that he did not kill, and her wife Lin Ye also believed her husband was innocent. Lin Ye said, "He has a good relationship with my brother. I have dinner together every Friday night.I know what my husband is like. He has a good relationship with my parents, my brother, my brother's children, and he loves them ... …In early investigations, police believed that the killer was more than one and no one could do it alone. " Lin Ye has attended the pretrial, two trials were suspended, and the third trial, which lasted for 9 months but failed to reach a consensus ruling, and this trial,some groups believed that Xie Lianbin was innocent and provided support to Lin Biao during the trial. On February 13, 2017, the Sydney Lin family's blood casewas sentenced in the High Court of NSW, and Xie Lianbin was sentenced to five consecutive life sentences without bail. Justice Fullerton said: "Consider the testimony of the surviving member of the family, Miss AB, during the sentence. The criminal committed sexual violence against her after the killing. His behavior is extremely horrible, and life imprisonment is the only appropriate sentence." The justice said: "This prisoner is at risk of violent crime in the future. Due to the protection of social security, he will not be released on bail. He will die in prison." After nearly eight years of interrogation, the Lin family's bloody case finally came to a ruling. Xie Lianbin's representative lawyer did not make any claims on behalf of Xie Lianbin. Xie Lianbin and his wife Lin Ye "seemed calm" when they heard the verdict, and said they would continue to appeal. Lin Ye called Xie Lian Bin the "scapegoat" in this case. In a statement issued in court, Xie Lianbin was sent to prison, Lin Lin's daughter. During the lengthy interrogation, at the time of the crime, Lin Su, 15, was protected by law and her identity and evidence were not reported by the media. At the time of the murder, Lin Su was attending a girl's high school, travelling to New Caledonia with her school, and spending summer vacations on a tropical island. A friend sent her a Facebook news link. When she saw the news picture was her home, she knew that her family had been murdered. Lin Su said, "That feeling is too unreal. I am completely shocked and can't believe it." She went home on the first flight of the day, and her aunt Lin Ying and uncle Xie Lianbin came to comfort her. Lin Su said, "My aunt gave me a big hug while crying, and then I realized that it was all true." Become an orphan overnight, Lin Su felt very upset, and he didn't know what to do all day. Xie Lianbin looked at Lin Su's plight, and Lin Su was taken over by her aunt and later became her guardian. On February 13, 2017, an exclusive interview with Lin Su was broadcast on Sunday Evening on Australian Channel 7. She said: "That killer not only killed my family, but also sexually assaulted me!" The host asked her, "Are you sexually assaulted by uncle Xie Lianbin?" Lin Su replied, "Yes, he sexually assaulted me ... It was the most difficult experience for me." "I hope everyone respects my privacy. Maybe someday in the future, I can calmly talk about it, but at this moment, I can't do it. I don't know how to express how it hurts me. . " Lin Su said that Xie Lianbin had been molested many times before the incident. After he moved into the Xie family's residence, the molestation was more frequent. Lin Su said that she respects Lin Ye very much, which is one of the reasons why she doesn't want to tell the truth. She said, "I decided to bury sexual assault in my heart for the sake of Lin Ye." Lin Su said, "After the bloodshed, I thought whether my uncle's sexual assault on me would be just a motive for murder, but this should not be the reason he took five lives." In May 2011, Xie Lianbin was arrested by the police for his involvement in the bloody case. Lin Su determined that the murderer who had killed his close relative was actually the uncle who had lived with him in the same house. "If Xie Lianbin is guilty, I don't want my aunt Lin Ye to live with him for the rest of my life ...I will tell the court everything I know." Lin Su said, "After many trials, I was very disappointed with my aunt. When I testified, I told the truth. She sent me several text messages saying that uncle was innocent and that the police had framed him. One day she can realize all I said was true, without him it would only make her better. " In December 2018, Xie Lianbin, sentenced to life imprisonment, appealed against the verdict.

This book addresses big data as a socio-technical construct with huge potential for innovation in key sectors such as healthcare, government and business. Big data and its increasingly widespread use in such influential spheres can generate ethically controversial decisions, including questions surrounding privacy, consent and accountability. This book attempts to unpack the epistemological implications of the term ‘big data’, as well as the opportunities and responsibilities which come with it. The author analyses the linguistic texture of the big data narrative in the news media, in healthcare and in EU law on data protection, in order to contribute to its understanding from the critical perspective of language studies. The result is a study which will be of interest to students and scholars working in the digital humanities, corpus linguistics, and discourse studies.

also records of the manner in which the work of the different sections of of the exhibition was carried out, the official awards of the executive commisioners, the catalogue of exhibits, together with sundry illustrations.

Today the world’s largest economies and corporations trade in data and its products to generate value in new disruptive markets. Within these markets vast streams of data are often inaccessible or untapped and controlled by powerful monopolies. Counter to this exclusive use of data is a promising world-wide “open-data” movement, promoting freely accessible information to share, reuse and redistribute. The provision and application of open data has enormous potential to transform exclusive, technocratic “smart cities” into inclusive and responsive “open-cities”. This book argues that those who contribute urban data should benefit from its production. Like the city itself, the information landscape is a public asset produced through collective effort, attention, and resources. People produce data through their engagement with the city, creating digital footprints through social medial, mobility applications, and city sensors. By opening up data there is potential to generate greater value by supporting unforeseen collaborations, spontaneous urban innovations and solutions, and improved decision-making insights. Yet achieving more open cities is made challenging by conflicting desires for urban anonymity, sociability, privacy and transparency. This book engages with these issues through a variety of critical perspectives, and presents strategies, tools and case studies that enable this transformation.