SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Dmitry Lopatin, a 26-year-old scientist who invented a cheap new kind of solar battery, has come across an unexpected obstacle. He was slapped with a three-year suspended jail sentence, for using banned materials in his invention. The researcher was facing 11 years behind bars, but the prosecutor's office dealing with the case agreed that a suspended sentence would suffice, the TASS news agency reported.
From rt.com:
Lopatin got in trouble with the authorities for using a solvent called gamma-Butyrolactone in order to make his solar batteries. It turned out this was a banned substance in Russia. He had placed a mail order for the solvent from China, and he was arrested when he went to collect it from the post office in June.
The researcher had tried to use a different substance, but found that it was too toxic to work with.
"In my work I was using a solvent which is toxic and can cause cancer. That is why I tried to find a substitute. I found one via the Internet and ordered it," he told RT.
"A month and a half later the parcel reached customs and I was called in and detained. Police launched a criminal case against me and I was interrogated. There were several court hearings. I chose to order from China because of the strict laws there. I had no idea that in China I could order a solvent which is banned in Russia."
Given that he is a researcher, is the use of the banned substance reasonable?
Original Submission
(Score: 5, Insightful) by frojack on Monday July 20 2015, @12:29AM
Given that he is a researcher, is the use of the banned substance reasonable?
Is being a researcher the excuse de jour these days?
Not wrapped in any institution (which might have caught the order), says this guy is some sort of free lance garage mechanic.
If Russia doesn't have an on line or published list of banned substances then you have a secret law - in which case there is no fair way assign culpability for the infraction or the penalty.
On the other hand if he could have checked, and simply did't bother, then the punishment fit the crime. Its not uncommon to be able to order stuff and get it shipped into places where it is against the law. Even in the US, customs is there to catch the boatloads, not the individually wrapped packages in a semi-truck full of packages.
You get no pass for being a "researcher"
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by NCommander on Monday July 20 2015, @12:44AM
A quick trip to Wikipedia suggests that it can be used as a recreational drug, and Russia has it classified as a "psychotropic substance". Honestly, my guess is a narcotics dog located when it was in customs processing, or the seller was flagging in a Russian database.
Still always moving
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday July 20 2015, @12:56AM
Yeah, you know, nothing nowadays can be invented outside any institution.
Perhaps this is why the prosecution wants him wrapped in prison, this will surely lend some credence to his research.
TFA quotes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @01:42AM
So he is a drug dealer that got caught.
(Score: 2) by GungnirSniper on Monday July 20 2015, @01:56AM
Considering that Russia's economy has been largely growing thanks to oil and gas exports, it is not out of the question that his work upset someone powerful.
Tips for better submissions to help our site grow. [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Monday July 20 2015, @03:06AM
So he went to Amsterdam last year, then he ordered a compound that "...is used as a recreational intoxicant with effects similar to alcohol." from China. Nothing suspicious there, eh?
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday July 20 2015, @04:35AM
If this is not an argument in favour of a "research use", I don't know what is.
Because... why the f*** would a Russian want a more expensive vodka substitute?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by sjames on Monday July 20 2015, @02:41AM
Then again, when is the last time you checked the controlled substances act before buying a common industrial solvent online?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by tftp on Monday July 20 2015, @06:55AM
Then again, when is the last time you checked the controlled substances act before buying a common industrial solvent online?
I had to check some laws [fedex.com] when buying Lithium batteries from Digi-Key. It's legal to buy, but not legal to put them on the airplane - on some conditions, like the amount of Lithium. Digi-Key checks for that for me - but if I am not careful I may add a battery to a large, urgent order and have it downgraded from an overnight to a FedEx Ground, which takes a week or more. And I can't do anything about it once the package ships. That might wreck my production plans.
In this case researchers should be able to get whatever reagents they need from wherever - but if a neuroscientist legitimately needs LSD or heroin for his research on animals, perhaps it is ill-advised to buy those chemicals in a ghetto, or from the Silk Road, or mail-order them from a Mexican cartel and take delivery in an abandoned warehouse. He should order it through his research facility. If he is a garage scientist... it's too bad, so sad; there is no way to know what he is getting them for. A private researcher in the USA does not automatically gain access to drugs and explosives just because he says that he is a researcher. He'd be telling that to his arresting officer, and then to the prosecutor.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @08:50AM
"We found heroin under your seat. What do you have to say to it?"
"Well, I'm a private researcher, and I need that stuff for my research."
"Really? What is that research about?"
"About how those drugs act on the human mind."
"So you planned to intoxicate people with this?"
"Oh no, I'm an ethical researcher. I'm only doing self experiments."
(Score: 2) by sjames on Monday July 20 2015, @01:16PM
A private researcher in the USA does not automatically gain access to drugs and explosives just because he says that he is a researcher.
True, but that's for something that is primarily a drug or an explosive (nitroglycerin might even be considered both)
This is about something that is primarily considered a solvent that various crazy drug laws now treat as a drug because it became somewhat popular to get high from it, unlike toluene which is still treated as just a solvent even though some choose to get high on it.
He didn't buy it on the Silk Road or in a back ally, he bought it from a perfectly prosaic industrial chemical supplier. The fact that he didn't make any attempt to obscure what it was, who he was, or where he was tells us his state of mind.
Sort of like you must be 21 to buy ethanol for consumption unless it's a flavor extract. This is a bit like a minor being surprised to be busted for buying a bottle of lemon extract at the grocery store.
(Score: 1) by tftp on Monday July 20 2015, @03:57PM
Unfortunately the entire purpose of laws is to classify human behavior into thousands of categories - and some of those categories represent illegal activities. In the USA a felon may not buy a gun (unless he jumps through extra hoops) not because he is dangerous, but because he had been classified as dangerous. An F-1 car driver may not drive on a common freeway faster than posted speed even if he is perfectly capable of handling the car. The only adjustable point in this system is the court and the judge - and in this case that adjustment worked, to some extent. In other countries some laws come with mandatory sentences - and then not much the judge can do about it; or the jury - short of nullification, which is anathema.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday July 20 2015, @05:08PM
Which is why he gets a suspended sentence.
Said suspended sentence is too long for my taste (you get less than that in many places for robbery or grand theft), but it's a warning to be mindful that the law applies to "researchers" who import random banned stuff from abroad.
(Score: 1) by Francis on Monday July 20 2015, @03:42AM
I think that as a researcher he should know the legal status of the chemicals that he's wanting to use. Having to order some from a foreign country because none of the domestic sources carry it is probably a bit of a warning to consider the legality of the substance. Obviously, it's not always a matter of legality, but whenever I'm crossing the border or having things shipped to me, I do my best to figure out if they're legal.
But, more to the point, even if they hadn't intercepted this package, how was he going to produce these batteries without being able to buy the materials?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @04:11AM
He is a researcher, not a manufacturer. Once he had a working design or portion of a design it could either be sold off to someone else to worry about or if he was so inclined, manufacture in china.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by FatPhil on Monday July 20 2015, @07:42AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 3, Insightful) by janrinok on Monday July 20 2015, @09:41AM
Well, it is a suspended sentence - it could have been a lot worse.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @10:03PM
"It could have been worse." isn't a justification for anything.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Tuesday July 21 2015, @07:05AM
It doesn't require 'justification'. He committed a crime - and even in the US claiming ignorance of the law is no defence. As a researcher he should make sure that he is aware of the laws regarding his area of research and, in this case, regarding the chemicals he is handling. He is a 'garage' researcher - otherwise by now his employers would have also been involved. Therefore, it is his responsibility to make sure that he knows what he is doing. The fact that the chemicals he was seeking are not freely available in Russia should have been something of a hint.
The post I was replying to said the punishment should fit the crime, and I pointed out that the sentence was suspended. He doesn't have to go to prison unless he re-offends. He has been dealt with and shown a degree of leniency.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday July 21 2015, @08:12AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves