Lawyer's character

Chapter 694: This mouth...cannot offend anyone

"The defendant's defender can ask questions to the witnesses," the presiding judge said.

"Professor Liu, if the victim himself has heart disease, or if there is deep damage to the front of the spleen after being hit, involving the splenic hilum, and damaging the large blood vessels, will the victim's time of death change and be different from what you said before? "Fang Yi asked.

Professor Liu was stunned for a moment. Apparently he did not expect that the defender would ask such a professional question. For a lawyer who engages in law, if he had not studied surgery and changed his profession to become a lawyer, he probably would not have mentioned the medical term "spleen door". professional vocabulary.

Moreover, what the other party said was so professional. As soon as I heard this, I knew that it was not something that a pure legal person could say. The question went straight to the key points without any nonsense. Unless the defender had consulted relevant experts before, Professor Liu's attitude became more serious when he thought of this.

"If the damage to the front of the spleen is deep, involves the splenic hilum, and damages the large blood vessels, or the injured person has heart disease, the injured person will die within a short period of time." Professor Liu thought for a moment and said.

"How long is the short period of time you are talking about?" Fang Yi continued to ask.

"Within one hour, but depending on the patient's different injuries and individual differences, the time may be shorter. It cannot be generalized." Professor Liu explained.

As the saying goes, the end of medicine is metaphysics. The human body itself is a precision instrument. It is impossible to explore all the mysteries of the human body with the current level of medical skills. Regarding the problems in this case, even foreign medical experts may not be able to give an accurate time of death. .

After hearing this, the presiding judge couldn't help but frown. This is too damn difficult. He's doing Tai Chi. He's trying to pass the blame on me! As a legal professional, I have to do the work of a doctor. It’s so difficult for me!

Yun Qiao, who was sitting next to Fang Yi, couldn't help but curled his lips secretly after hearing the expert's words: This expert is really an expert, he can say all the good and bad things, and no one can be offended.

…

“The facts of this case have been clearly investigated, the court investigation has ended, and now the court debate has begun. The court debate mainly revolves around the disputed facts that have not been certified by the court and the issue of how the law should be applied based on the facts.

The prosecutor will speak first. "said the presiding judge.

"Presiding judge, judge: The prosecutor believes that the defendant Du Wending drove a motor vehicle while drunk and caused a major traffic accident. After the accident, in order to evade legal responsibility, the defendant abandoned the victim in a roadside field on the way to the county hospital. , causing the victim to die without timely treatment.

The defendant's behavior complied with the provisions of Article 6 of the "Interpretations of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Law in the Trial of Criminal Cases of Traffic Accidents" and should be punished as intentional homicide. The prosecutor recommended that the defendant Du Wending be sentenced to ten years in prison. complete. "The prosecutor spoke.

…

"The defendant's defender expressed his defense opinion." The presiding judge looked at Fang Yi.

"Presiding judge, judge: The defender believes that the defendant Du Wending committed the crime of traffic accident and did not constitute the crime of intentional homicide. The reasons are as follows:

1. The behavior of the defendant Du Wending in this case does not meet the conditions for converting the crime of traffic accident into the crime of intentional homicide.

According to Article 6 of the "Interpretations of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Law in the Trial of Criminal Cases of Traffic Accidents", in order to evade legal investigation after a traffic accident, the perpetrator takes the victim away from the scene and then hides or abandons it, so that the victim cannot obtain Anyone who dies during rescue operations shall be convicted and punished for intentional homicide in accordance with the provisions of Article 232 of the Criminal Law.

According to Article 6 of the above interpretation, traffic accident cases for which criminal liability is investigated for intentional homicide must meet the following three conditions at the same time:

1. After a traffic accident occurs, the perpetrator takes the victim away from the accident scene and hides or abandons him.

This includes two actions: first, taking the victim away from the scene of the accident; second, hiding or abandoning the victim in order to avoid legal punishment.

2. The perpetrator’s subjective purpose of carrying out the above-mentioned behavior is to avoid legal investigation. Whether or not his purpose can succeed will not affect the conviction.

However, if the perpetrator takes the victim away from the scene of the accident for the purpose of rescuing the victim or for fear of retaliation from the victim's relatives, or for other purposes, but not for the purpose of hiding or abandoning the victim, this condition is not met.

3. The perpetrator concealed or abandoned the victim, resulting in the victim's eventual death or severe disability.

It can be seen from this that if the victim dies before being taken away from the scene by the perpetrator, or dies due to being hidden or abandoned and unable to be rescued, or the victim is seriously injured, death will inevitably occur before being hidden or abandoned. , the perpetrator cannot be punished for intentional homicide.

In this case, the evidence on file cannot prove the exact time of the victim's death and whether the consequences of his death were due to the defendant's abandonment and inability to receive rescue. There are three reasons for this:

First of all, in this case, whether the victim was dead or alive when he was abandoned is one of the prerequisite factors in determining whether the defendant committed intentional homicide. However, neither the evidence in the case nor the opinions of expert witnesses could prove that the victim was not dead when he was abandoned.

According to Du Wending's confession, on the way to the county hospital for rescue, he stopped the car four times and called out to the victim, but the victim did not respond. Therefore, he believed that the victim was dead and there was no need for further treatment. This is how the defendant came up with the idea of ​​dumping the body.

Even so, in order to confirm whether the victim was dead, Du Wending observed the scene for a while, but still did not see any reaction from the victim. As a result, the defendant became more convinced that the victim was indeed dead, and then left the scene.

According to the victim's performance when he was treated by the doctor in the health room, the conclusion of the cause of death, and the expert's analysis, the victim should have died before being abandoned.

Secondly, according to the evidence in the case, the victim was hit and suffered traumatic splenic rupture and left humeral fracture. However, it is impossible to find out whether the victim's splenic rupture injured the splenic hilum or whether it was accompanied by rupture of the great splenic hilum blood vessel. In other words, it cannot be determined whether the death of the victim could have been avoided under normal circumstances.

Finally, it is also impossible to determine whether there is a causal relationship under criminal law between the victim's death and the defendant's abandonment.

The defender believes that when the above facts cannot be ascertained, in line with the principle of benefiting the defendant, the defendant Du Wen should be convicted of traffic accidents instead of intentional homicide.

2. Du Wen, the defendant in this case, is guilty of causing a traffic accident.

In this case, the defendant Du Wending drove a motor vehicle while drunk and caused a traffic accident, resulting in the death of one person. He was fully responsible for the accident. His behavior constituted the crime of traffic accident.

After the traffic accident, the defendant took the victim away from the scene and went to the nearest clinic for the purpose of treating the victim. Then he followed the doctor's advice and sent the defendant to the county hospital for rescue.

Although the victim died on the way to the county hospital and he abandoned the victim, the defendant's subjective mentality was always to actively treat the victim, so it did not constitute a hit-and-run.

In view that the defendant’s family has already compensated the victim’s family and the defendant has obtained the understanding of the victim’s family, the defender suggested that the defendant be punished as a traffic accident and be sentenced to a fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years. complete. "After Fang Yi finished speaking, he glanced at Du Wending. The latter lowered his head and looked at the shoes, unable to tell what his expression was.