[Skybird]

His comments must be seen against not our but Chinese cultural background - and that could mean that his anger about the selfishness of one individual will be differently measured by a court, than it would in our Western nations (and our infinite plethora of laws and addendums to laws and special rulings complementing laws and precedences and... and... and...). I do not know the Chinese laws, but even if they equal Western laws in this special circumstances of a situation, it could be that the different culture and different assessement of "individual versus group interest" make the court's judgement somewhat milder. On the other hand one should not forget that it is an authoritarian regime and a social structure traditionally emphasiozing values like obedience and loyalty to laws - which could also lead the man being sentenced quite toughly.

It will also depend on - I assume - whether or not the man can be proven to have been aware (or not) that there was the air cushion below the jumper. If he is found to have been aware of it, I personally eventually would argue to let the pusher go without conseqeunces at all - because he has prevented the suicding guy from moving elsewhere where there was no aircushion, then jumping and killing himself. By pushing the guy, the pusher would have prevented worse outcomes.

I dare no bet what they will do with him. But I'm quite curious.

There is the serious intention to commit suicide, and there is what psychologists call "appellativer Selbstmord" (appealling suicide?) where the threat to commit suicide is meant as a call for help or attention or is a narcissitic tactic of blackmailing. It can be difficult to differ between the two. But in principle I see neither a legal nor an ethical basis to hinder somebody killing himself if he really wants to be dead, and therefore I accept only in case of the latter people - those who are appealing, but not really wanting to be dead - to intervene. However, that intervention already is another ethical problem in itself, eventually. It's tricky business, really, and one should not try to act by a generalised blueprint (to which especially psychologists, jurists and religious zealots are prone), but judge on an individual case-by-case assessment.

Of course, laws that forbid suicide (or even declare death penalty for attempted suicide, like historically it has been the case in some european countries) are not only not helpful, but are simply absurd.