Lawyer's character

Zhou Ying watched her keep shaking her head: "I can only plead guilty to a lesser crime, but I can't plead not guilty to you. I personally think that this defense is in your best interest."

Jiang Chunzhi's mother shed tears after listening to Zhou Ying's words: "Chunzhi, my mother is sorry for you. If I had let you continue studying... But our family is poor and cannot afford to support you and your brother..."

"Mom, it's all in the past. I don't blame anyone. It's all my own fault. I took the wrong path." Jiang Chunzhi turned to look at his mother, his eyes full of sadness, and handed him a tissue. To mother.

"Lawyer Zhou, how many years will I be sentenced?" Jiang Chunzhi's mood is relatively stable and she has not collapsed. It seems that she has been mentally prepared.

"It's hard to say now. I will fight for a suspended sentence for you." Zhou Jing said calmly.

"Thank you, thank you Lawyer Zhou." After Jiang Chunzhi said this, he supported his mother and left the law firm.

Zhou Ying knew a little about Jiang Chunzhi's past. Before she went to the detention center to see Jiang Chunzhi, her mother had told Zhou Ying that at that time, Jiang Chunzhi was doing very well in studies and was ranked among the top three in the grade. Jiang Chunzhi relied on her father to earn money from odd jobs and could not afford the tuition fees for her and her brother.

When she was in the second grade of junior high school, her father burned all her books and refused to let her go to school. She knelt down and begged her father, but her father squatted at the door smoking a cigarette and said nothing, and her mother could only wipe her tears. .

The head teacher knew that after Jiang Chunzhi dropped out of school, he came to see her specifically and wanted to work for her parents. But by then Jiang Chunzhi had already followed the villagers to work in a factory in the south carrying simple luggage.

He had no education, was young, and was being exploited by his boss. He didn't make much money after working for two years. Instead, he got into a lot of trouble because of his outstanding appearance. She later left the factory.

No one knew what she had gone through. When she returned to her hometown, her whole person had lost its original simplicity and had more of a dusty atmosphere.

Until she was caught, rumors about her swept through the surrounding villages and towns like a tornado. It seemed that overnight everyone knew that the Lao Jiang family had a daughter who had corrupted the family tradition. Her parents dared not go out and could not hold their heads up.

The younger brother who went to college in other provinces and received his sister's living expenses on time every month seemed to have suddenly evaporated after hearing about his sister. He never called her again, and even when he was released on bail pending trial, he never came back to see her. Pass her.

Maybe Jiang Chunzhi has thought of today, or her heart has long been numb and she has thought about it. Her emotions did not fluctuate much, and her eyes were so empty, as if the world had long since lost its meaning to her. Some colors.

Over the years, she has helped her parents raise a college student, which is the only thing she feels happy about.

Zhou Ying watched the elevator door slowly closing, feeling a little depressed. Money in this world will flow to those who are not short of money, and love in this world will also flow to those who are never short of love. But those who really need money, need love But people are always chasing, no matter how much effort or love they put in, it is never enough.

…

I don't know if it was God's will or a coincidence, but the Ma Liangyou embezzlement case handled by Fang Yi and the Gao Peili intentional homicide case handled by Meng Guangda were tried on the same day.

Ma Liangyou's embezzlement case was a private prosecution case, so there was no public prosecutor across from the defense table, but the private prosecutor, Boss Liu. Before the trial, Ma Liangyou went to see Boss Liu a second time, but Boss Liu didn't see him at all and asked someone to tell him that if he had anything to say to the court.

I don’t know whether it was because I felt sorry for the money or because I felt that I was sure of victory. Boss Liu was the only private prosecutor at the table and he did not hire a lawyer.

"We are now conducting court investigation. Please ask the private prosecutor Liu Changshui (Boss Liu) to read out the indictment." The presiding judge looked at Boss Liu.

Boss Liu read the indictment, and what he said was similar to what Qian Yi had learned. Boss Liu accused the defendant Ma Liangyou of committing embezzlement.

"Defendant Ma Liangyou, did you hear clearly the indictment just read out by the private prosecutor? What crime are you accused of committing? Do you have any objection to the criminal facts accused of you in the indictment?" The presiding judge looked at Ma Liang, who was sitting in the dock. friend.

"I have objections. I did not misappropriate his property. After the stainless steel putty knife was stolen from the warehouse, I explained the situation to Liu Changshui and I was willing to compensate him for his losses, but he did not agree..." Ma Liangyou argued road.

…

Both parties recognized the facts of this case, and the focus of the dispute was on qualitative issues, so the previous procedures went relatively smoothly.

“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 private prosecutor spoke. "said the presiding judge.

"I stick to my previous opinion and ask the court to sentence the defendant for embezzlement in accordance with the law." Liu Changshui didn't know what to say. When he consulted a lawyer before, because he was reluctant to spend money, the lawyer didn't say much to him and only drafted a letter for him. A criminal private prosecution indictment.

"The defendant defended himself." The presiding judge felt that neither the private prosecutor nor the defendant had much legal knowledge, and if they were asked to talk too much, they would not get to the point. It was a waste of time to talk about it, and they did not expect them to say much. Professional defense advice.

"I don't think I committed a crime. I didn't take his goods and didn't give them to him. The goods in the warehouse were stolen. I really didn't know it was my son who did it at first. I said I should pay for it, but he didn't agree..." Ma Liang Friends expressed their defense opinions.

"The defendant's defender expressed his defense opinion." After speaking, the presiding judge began to clear away the case files on the table.

"Presiding Judge, Judge: The defender believes that although the defendant Ma Liangyou has the subject status of 'keeping other people's property on behalf of others', he does not have the circumstances of 'refusing to return', and Ma Liangyou's behavior does not constitute the crime of embezzlement. The specific reasons are as follows:

Paragraph 1 of Article 270 of the "Criminal Law" stipulates that if someone illegally takes another person's property that has been kept for safekeeping as his own, the amount is relatively large, and refuses to return it, it is a crime of embezzlement.

According to the above provisions, keeping other people's property on behalf of others and refusing to return it are two important conditions for constituting the crime of embezzlement.

To constitute the crime of embezzlement, the perpetrator must have the fact that he or she has taken custody of the property of others.

The custody relationship in this case arises from a processing contract, that is, a contract in which the contractor completes the work and delivers the results in accordance with the ordering party's requirements, and the ordering party pays remuneration.

There are two types of contracts: the first is that the raw materials for processing are selected by the contractor; the second is that the raw materials are provided by the customer.

In the first case, the orderer is not responsible for providing raw materials. The contractor pays for the purchase of materials in advance and has ownership of the materials he chooses. For the work results completed using the materials, if the contractor does not deliver them to the given Being a human being does not constitute the crime of embezzlement, but only constitutes a civil breach of contract.

In the second case, the customer provides the raw materials, and the ownership of the raw materials does not transfer after they are delivered to the contractor. The contractor only enjoys the right to use the raw materials according to the purpose of the contract.

In this case, the contractor has the obligation to return the work results that have been processed using raw materials. At this time, the raw materials are in a state of custody. Refusal to return them is considered misappropriation.

In this case, there is a processing contract between the private prosecutor Liu Changshui and the defendant Ma Liangyou, and the content of the contract belongs to the second contracting model mentioned above. From a formal point of view, it meets the conditions for custody for the crime of embezzlement.

However, looking at the entire case, the defendant Ma Liangyou did not refuse to return the goods.

To determine that the perpetrator "refuses to return" requires that the perpetrator subjectively does not want to return the money and objectively expresses his intention not to return it with actual actions.

If the actor actually disposes of another person's property that has been kept on his behalf by selling, donating, using, etc., and then expresses his willingness to compensate the owner of the property for economic losses, this does not constitute "refusal to return."

Because in most cases, the value of property can be reflected in currency. When the original property cannot be returned, if the perpetrator is willing to compensate with currency or similar objects, it shows that he does not have the intention of illegal possession and should not be found to be a crime of embezzlement.

In this case, after the private prosecutor reported the case, the public security organ recovered the stainless steel putty knives from the purchaser of the batch of stainless steel putty knives according to the defendant Ma Liangyou's instructions and returned them to the private prosecutor. There was no request from the private prosecutor Ma Liangyou. The goods are returned and he refuses to do so.

On the contrary, after the case occurred, the defendant expressed his willingness to pay equivalent compensation from the beginning, but was rejected by the private prosecutor.

Since the stainless steel putty knife is a kind of item, and the purpose of the private prosecutor entrusting the defendant to process it is also to sell it for profit, the defendant can completely compensate the private prosecutor's economic losses in the form of currency. Therefore, although the private prosecutor refuses to accept compensation, it cannot deny the defendant. People have the willingness and ability to compensate.

Accordingly, defendant Ma Liangyou’s behavior did not meet the requirement of ‘refusal to return’ for the crime of embezzlement, and his behavior did not constitute the crime of embezzlement. Please ask the court to rule the defendant not guilty according to law. "Fang Yi expressed his defense opinion.

…

While Fang Yi was expressing his defense opinions, Meng Guangda was also impassionedly expressing his defense opinions for Gao Peili.

“Presiding judge, judge: The defender has no objection to the prosecutor’s accusation of intentional homicide against the defendant. However, the defender believes that the defendant has extenuating circumstances and recommends that the court give a lighter punishment. The specific reasons are as follows:

1. The defendant killed his husband because he had suffered long-term abuse and domestic violence, which should be considered a ‘less serious case’ as stipulated in Article 232 of the Criminal Law.

1. Although the method used by the defendant to torture and kill her husband was relatively cruel and resulted in the death of the victim, this was due to the fact that the defendant had been subjected to domestic violence and abuse by her husband for a long time.

The defense believes that the defendant's behavior is psychologically a manifestation of "battered woman syndrome". ‘Battered women syndrome’ is generally used to refer to a special behavioral pattern exhibited by women who have been violently abused by their husbands or boyfriends for a long time. This psychological symptom consists of two concepts: a cycle of violence and an acquired sense of helplessness.

The cyclical cycle of violence allows women to anticipate the timing and severity of the next wave of violence, leaving them in a constant state of panic.

Long-term exposure to violence and panic makes women gradually become psychologically paralyzed, becoming more and more passive, submissive, and helpless.

When this kind of mental restraint accumulates to a certain extent, once it breaks out, it is easy to go to extremes, lose control, and lose control. Due to the limitations of the battered woman's ability to resist and the fear of her abusive husband, the time when she loses control and kills her husband is often not while the illegal violation is ongoing. Therefore, this kind of husband-killing cannot be mitigated or exempted from punishment on the grounds of legitimate defense. However, the defendant's behavior was caused by the victim's serious fault.

In view of the fact that the victim in this type of situation, that is, the perpetrator of domestic violence, has a major fault in the cause of the crime, in previous cases, the killing of a husband due to long-term abuse is generally considered to be a "lesser case" in the crime of intentional homicide. (Defenders have submitted relevant criminal cases).

2. When sentencing women who kill their husbands due to long-term abuse and domestic violence, they should be treated as "minor circumstances", which can achieve better social effects and have positive significance in curbing the growth and spread of domestic violence.

From the current point of view, the currently effective laws and regulations on stopping domestic violence are not very operable. Although Article 3 of the Marriage Law (abolished after the Civil Code came into effect) has provisions prohibiting domestic violence, The scale and basis of punishment are difficult to grasp.

In recent years, due to imperfect rules and regulations, perpetrators of domestic violence have become more unscrupulous, and domestic violence has become more and more intense.

Determining the act of battering and killing one's husband as a minor crime will inevitably make the perpetrators of domestic violence restrain themselves and serve as a good social guide.

In addition, the victim in this case was tortured and killed her husband, which is a highly targeted killing. The possibility of the perpetrator committing the same crime again is very small. In addition, the perpetrator’s subjective malignancy is relatively small. He has gained everyone’s sympathy morally. Therefore, he should be severely punished. Abused women like the defendant, who pose almost no physical danger, do more harm than good to the country, society and their children, and may also bring about more serious social-oriented problems.

Therefore, the defender believes that the murder of a husband due to long-term abuse and domestic violence is considered a 'less serious case' stipulated in Article 232 of the Criminal Law, which is in line with the criminal policy of balancing leniency with severity and in line with the "lenient" punishment. and the development trend of “humanization”.

In this case, the defendant Gao Peili and the victim Bai Kejun had been married for more than seven years. The victim often beat, scolded and abused the defendant for no reason. The defendant also tried to seek help from the village committee and the Women's Federation many times, but the problem could not be completely solved.

On the day of the incident, after a long beating and scolding, the defendant's long-standing grudge broke out and he killed her husband. He then surrendered to the public security organ.

According to the evidence in the case, the local Women's Federation submitted an application report calling for a lighter sentence for the defendant Gao Peili, and the local government issued a petition signed by more than 700 people calling for a lighter sentence for the defendant Gao Peili. All this represents the public sentiment. The law is not only ruthless, but also plays a guiding role in society.

This case is a very typical husband-killing case caused by long-term abuse and domestic violence. The victim made a major fault in the cause of the crime. The defendant has received sympathy from the public. The defendant Gao Peili’s husband-killing behavior should be recognized as the 200th crime of the Criminal Law. 'Lesser circumstances' stipulated in Article 32. "After Meng Guangda made the first point of his defense opinion, he cleared his throat and paused. He wanted the judge and everyone in the gallery to digest it.

It's really difficult to separate them, so I can only merge a large chapter. There will be a chapter later. Please wait.