As a Lawyer, You Sent the Judge In?

Chapter 232: Defendant: I am not guilty of disobeying the verdict! Su

Chapter 232 Defendant: I am not guilty of disobeying the verdict! Su Bai: Who believes it?

Different ways of judgment represent subjective inconsistencies.

The main basis for intentional and negligent conduct is foreseeability or lack of foresight.

In the process.

The most subjective judgment is the behavior of Dong Bing and Fang Tang.

The criminal facts of Xu Feng, Li Tao and Zhang Manlei were established.

In this case, it cannot be refuted.

So the actions of Dong Bing and Fang Tang constitute negligence causing death? Or does it constitute an intentional act?

Need to see evidence.

….

On the court hearing stage.

Wang Lei didn't have much emotion, and said with a calm expression: "About this case."

“The criminal facts of Xu Feng, Li Tao and Zhang Manlei are clear.”

“Xu Feng, Li Tao, and Zhang Manlei, do you three plead guilty and accept punishment...?”

Xu Feng and the other three did not hire lawyers for defense.

Instead, we found an aid lawyer. The aid lawyer’s determination of this case was—

Once the facts of the crime have been established, there is no point in continuing to plead guilty, so plead guilty and accept punishment.

So—

According to the entrustment wishes of Xu Feng and three others, he pleaded guilty.

This will alleviate the three persons’ crimes.

The aid lawyer said: "Our client pleads guilty and accepts punishment, and will not continue to plead."

"OK."

Wang Lei nodded slightly.

Next, what needs to be faced is the accusation and identification of the crimes of Fang Tang and Dong Bing.

Wang Lei took a look at the litigation materials and then spoke:

“The defendants Fang Fangtang and Dong Bing are suspected of producing perjury, colluding with each other, and negligently causing death.”

“In response to the above charges, do the defendants Dong Bing and Fang Tang need to plead?”

Facing the presiding judge’s questioning, Fang Tang and Dong Bing had reluctance written all over their faces.

When this case was prosecuted, both people were very confused.

In their hearts, isn’t this just a small thing? Why was he suddenly prosecuted?

They did make a mistake, but it wouldn't make such a big fuss, right?

Indictment was filed, and the sentence was still so long.

Definitely not!

In this case, they did not believe that they had done anything negligent.

The attorneys appointed by the two men also argued on this point.

The focus of the plea is.

It is determined that there is no negligent behavior!

“Presiding Judge, we believe that our parties, Fang Tang and Dong Bing, are not involved in negligence causing death.”

“Among them are the following points—”

“First, the contradictory behavior was carried out by the parties, Xu Feng, Lin Dong and others, and has no direct relationship with us.”

"Second, we were only angry at Lin Dong's behavior and did not take any other actions. Moreover, according to Xu Feng and others, the "wooden stick" at that time was the only physical evidence in this trial. , not found yet.”

“Only the confessions of Xu Feng and others prove this.”

“We have the right to suspect that this is a false accusation against us.”

“A single confession cannot form a complete chain of evidence.”

“Therefore, we cannot be found guilty.”

“We apply to drop the charges against us.”

The most critical point of this trial is also here.

Without physical evidence, can it be proved that Fang Tang and Dong Bing committed criminal negligence?

That is, they knew that Fang Tang and Dong Bing had committed crimes, but because there was no evidence, a complete chain of evidence could not be formed, and both Fang Tang and Dong Bing denied it.

There is no such thing as direct bite to death.

Su Bai:? ? ?

There is no problem in determining the crime of negligence, but now you are here to do it?

Let’s explain the chain of evidence, right?

Come on, come on, I'll let you explain!

Su Bai raised his hand to indicate that he had questions to ask. After getting the consent of the presiding judge Wang Lei, he said:

“Based on the defendant’s statement, I would like to ask a few questions…”

“First: No physical evidence can be found and the evidence chain is incomplete, but I would like to ask the defendant. Xu Feng and others admitted that they used wooden sticks to hit Lin Dong, causing his death.”

“And there are indeed signs of being hit by heavy objects such as wooden sticks on Lin Dong’s body.”

“Under the circumstances, why did the stick appear during guard time?”

“Did Xu Feng and others bring them in?”

“Xu Feng and others should have made a record of the seizure when they entered, right?”

“These should record whether Xu Feng and others brought wooden sticks, right?”

“I would like to ask the defendant how to reasonably explain the appearance of the wooden stick?”

“How do you explain the serious injuries caused by large sticks on the victim Lin Dong?”

Exhibit is a point of evidence.

If the crime is inferred solely from evidence, it will indeed not constitute a chain of evidence.

Behavior that falls short of a crime.

A confession is also a single piece of evidence and cannot be included in the chain of evidence.

But the other party’s lawyer ignored the most important point, which was that Xu Feng’s confession formed a chain of evidence with the scars on Lin Dong’s body.

To put it bluntly, the evidence is direct evidence, but Lin Dong’s injuries directly prove that Xu Feng’s confession is true, and it is also direct evidence.

So based on this….

It can be completely ignored what Fang Tang’s lawyer said. A single confession cannot form a chain of evidence and cannot constitute a criminal fact.

The key point of the two questions Su Bai asked is here.

The opposing lawyer obviously wants to exonerate himself by not being able to find any evidence.

But it doesn’t actually make any sense.…

Even if there is no verdict in this trial, it is clear that the other party's criminal behavior is already known, and the evidence will definitely be added. Evidence was found.

Or from other aspects, such as the core content of Su Bai's inquiry, the oral confession and the scars on Jialindong's body are equal to direct evidence...

A direct judgment may also be made.

Faced with Su Bai's inquiry, Fang Tang and Dong Bing focused all their attention on their client lawyers.

The lawyers appointed by the two men are well-known criminal lawyers from a law firm in Guangdong.

Faced with Su Bai's rhetorical question, Zhang Tao handed over the right to answer to Fang Tang and Dong Bing.

“Please give our client a statement and answer these questions.”

Zhang Tao opened his mouth and asked the question to Fang Tang and Dong Bing.

In Zhang Tao’s view, there is basically not much room for refutation in this case.

There are not too many problems with this crime of negligent causing death.

He had communicated with Fang Tang and Dong Bing that there was no need to make a not guilty defense for negligent death, and it would be better to make a commutation defense.

However, Fang Tang and Dong Bing insisted that they did not cause death due to negligence and their actions did not constitute a crime.

And strongly urge criminal lawyers to provide innocence defense.

Zhang Tao had no choice but to plead not guilty as requested by the two people.

And stating the matters in advance is likely to increase the penalty.

Fang Tang didn’t take Zhang Tao’s explanation to heart and just asked Zhang Tao to plead not guilty.

Zhang Tao had no choice but to agree. After all, he had already told the ugly story in front of him. If the other party still asked for it, he could only respond in accordance with the client's lawsuit application.

As for the content and results of the defense and the division of responsibilities, he is not responsible at all.

….

Facing Zhang Tao’s question, Fang Tang remained silent for a few seconds.

Just make your own statement.

Honestly and fiercely, he replied to related questions:

“The lawyer opposite has raised these questions, but I can’t answer them.”

“It’s not that I don’t want to answer, it’s because I don’t know where the stick and the scars on Lin Dong’s body came from.”

"but!"

“As for the accusation against me, I think it is totally a slander against me.”

“There is no substantive proof to say that Lin Dong and I had a quarrel, and that I instigated Xu Feng and others to beat Lin Dong.”

“Everything I do is in accordance with the law.”

“Xu Feng and others may have deliberately attacked, retaliated, and slandered me because of my identity!”

“This is completely a slander against me!”

“If you can’t find any physical evidence, why should you convict me?”

“Are you, the prosecutor and the court still being reasonable?”

“Isn’t this completely unreasonable?”

　　　　　　….

No, are you all starting to be so unreasonable now?

Physical evidence has to be produced to prove your guilt, right?

Other direct proof is not enough?

　　Deliberately not answering this question, and even trying to prove his "innocence" by biting back.

Why didn’t you answer the key questions I just asked?

Do you not know how to answer, or are you afraid to answer?

The old fried dough sticks belong to yes.

Su Bai thought silently in his heart.

At the judgment seat, Wang Lei:….

Who is the unreasonable person?

….…

at the same time.

In the live broadcast room of the court hearing, some people who were concerned about the case but did not know much about the law asked.

“This case lacks physical evidence, does that mean it cannot be decided?”

“I think what the defendant said makes sense. What if it’s a false accusation?”

“Is there anyone who can answer this question?”

　　【Follow Lawyer Su 18cm】: "Ahem... I have been following Lawyer Su, and I am also an experienced legal enthusiast."

“Let’s talk about it in general terms, don’t make jokes, everyone can point out any problems.”

“What I think is unreasonable is the defendant, right?”

"Although there is no physical evidence of the "wooden stick", Lin Dong's death is the result, coupled with the oral confessions of Xu Feng and others."

“Especially the most important point is Lawyer Su’s inquiry. I don’t know if everyone has noticed it.”

“Fang Tang and Dong Bing have always emphasized that the other party is a false accusation, but the prosecution and prosecution have produced relevant evidence. This does not mean that there is no doubt about the guilt, but that they are already guilty.”

"He also couldn't explain the origin of the "wooden stick" and the origin of the "wooden stick" scars. From this point of view, it should be possible to identify it, right?"

"Yes... what you said above is correct. Although the criminal law is based on the principle of doubtful guilt, direct evidence has shown that the other party is guilty. This Fang Tang and Dong Bing are completely talking nonsense."

“The lack of physical evidence does not affect the outcome of the verdict at all, because a chain of evidence has been formed. However, considering the influence of public opinion, the presiding judge delayed in pronouncing the verdict at the trial.”

"understood.…"

….

At the presiding judge's seat, Wang Lei's emotions were similar to those expressed in the barrage in the live broadcast room.

In terms of evidence in this case...it can definitely be concluded that Fang Tang and Dong Bing's negligence caused death.

However, the influence of public opinion needs to be taken into consideration.

after all.…

ˆ There will always be titles on the Internet that are accompanied by barrage pictures and various short compositions.

This is what Wang Lei needs to consider.

but.….

Wang Lei turned his attention to Su Bai.

During the last recess, Wang Lei got to know Su Bai.

What Su Bai knows is that in the court hearing, there are always different entry points.