As a Lawyer, You Sent the Judge In?

Chapter 341: Bang the table in court and question! How does the collegial panel define statutory scenarios? ! (little hot blast)

 For several consecutive questions from the presiding judge at the trial.

to be honest….

 It’s too tendentious.

Basically, it is not much different from the judgment of the first instance and the relevant circumstances recorded in the files.

  It’s just in the records of the first instance file.…

The judgment announced in the court hearing at that time was much more straightforward than in this second trial.

Facing several tendentious questions from the presiding judge, Su Bai raised his hand directly.

 “Presiding Judge.…”

“We believe that the presiding judge’s questions are not in line with legal fairness.”

“The presiding judge’s questions are too inclined to suggest that Xia Mingyuan is guilty.”

“Xia Mingyuan cannot answer the above questions at all, and there is no need to answer them.”

“So we apply to reject the presiding judge’s relevant questions.”

.

 …

Su Bai spoke directly and dismissed the above questions from the presiding judge.

The main reason for the rejection is, of course, that the presiding judge was biased during the inquiry, which was detrimental to his client both legally and rationally.

Then he must fight for the corresponding litigation rights and interests for his client in the court hearing.

However, in the face of Su Bai's rejection, Jiang Feng's expression was obviously unhappy in the court hearing.

He then spoke: "The inquiry I just asked about Xia Mingyuan was about the case."

“Xia Mingyuan does not have to answer this point, but Xia Mingyuan must bear the consequences personally.”

  ? ? ?

No, why should Xia Mingyuan be personally responsible?

 Legally, parties have the right to refuse to answer certain questions asked by the presiding judge.

 If you refuse to answer, the consequences will be borne by the parties concerned personally.

 But just now, Jiang Feng's inquiry was obviously extremely targeted.

Such targeted questions are completely inconsistent with relevant litigation regulations.

 According to the relevant legal proceedings, how can the criminal suspect be allowed to prove that the criminal suspect has not committed a crime?

“However, according to relevant procedural law provisions, criminal suspects are not allowed to testify themselves in court.”

“The presiding judge’s inquiry just now involves letting the criminal suspect prove his innocence.”

 “This is no longer in compliance with the rules of the Criminal Procedure Law.”

“We believe that even if our client is required to bear subsequent liability, does the presiding judge’s inquiry comply with relevant legal provisions and legal definitions?”

 At the trial bench, Jiang Feng, as the presiding judge, faced the questions raised by Su Bai.

Continue to speak: "As for whether there has been a violation of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law, as the presiding judge, I am very clear about this."

“Therefore, there will be no discussion on whether the appeal party’s determination complies with legal provisions and legal definitions.”

“Now, please ask Xia Mingyuan to answer the questions I raised. If you don’t answer, Xia Mingyuan will be personally responsible for the corresponding consequences.”

Facing the presiding judge's disregard for the procedural rules, Su Bai frowned slightly.

 Didn’t say anything.

It was just a look in the eyes indicating that Xia Mingyuan should answer how he should.

Although the presiding judge’s question did not comply with the relevant rules of the trial.

 However, no relevant judgment has been made, and we have been entangled in this aspect, and the trial cannot move forward.

 So, Su Bai made certain concessions on this point.

you ask I answer.

  However, if relevant judgments are made, it will definitely not be accepted.

But then again, this time the appeal went to the Municipal Intermediate People’s Court, and the case was decided based only on oral confessions and no objective factual evidence.

 Even let the criminal suspect prove his innocence.…

 Honestly...isn't this nonsense?

　　What happens when a criminal proves his or her own innocence and proves his or her subjectivity?

 Completely inconsistent with relevant procedures!

Let’s talk about that later.

 If the criminal cannot prove to himself that he has not committed a crime, can it be said from a side perspective that the criminal has committed a crime?

 Su Bai: .….

Concerning this point, there are clear provisions in the Criminal Procedure Law that criminal suspects shall not be required to testify themselves in court trials.

 Of course there are special circumstances, such as criminal facts.

For example, when a public official faces a charge of "unexplained source of huge amounts of property".

 The criminal suspect needs to explain the unknown huge amount of property and explain the source of the property.

  But this is a required act of self-certification when there are objective facts.

 The case against Xia Mingyuan is based on the fact that there are no facts, and there are no facts.

 itself is unreasonable.

On the other side, Jiang Feng was still questioning Xia Mingyuan:

“Xia Mingyuan, please answer the question I just asked.”

Xia Mingyuan really couldn’t provide any factual basis for the above question, so he said:

“I can’t produce any evidence to prove that I was not harassed or molested.”

“But I definitely did not call these students to the office intentionally, or for the reason that these students violated school rules.”

 “To get rid of harassment and threats.”

 “Many people in the school know this.”

“Also...I have not only punished these three students in school, but also many other students.”

“Then why don’t other students have this problem, but only these three students?”

“Although I can’t provide any evidence, I know that these three students are completely slandering me.”

 “A complete slander!”

 “I hope the presiding judge will take this situation into consideration.”

“Well... Regarding the issues you raised, the collegial panel will make relevant considerations.”

“According to the appellant’s current statement, the appellant does not have any evidence to show that it was not intentional and did not harm the three victims, right?”

 “Yes, there is no evidence.”

"OK."

Jiang Feng nodded: "Then does the appellant's lawyer have anything else to say?"

"some."

 “A piece of evidence that we apply for supplementary evidence.”

  “The application is approved.”     Su Bai submitted the relevant evidence to the staff on the side.

 After the staff on the side handed the evidence to the presiding judge, Su Bai continued to speak.

“Our additional evidence is a questionnaire survey on the school.”

“I visited the school and asked the students and teachers in the school about the practices and reputation of Wu Yan, He Juan, Li Bing and others in the school.”

“The three victims have a bad reputation in the school, and they often violate school regulations.”

 “Have repeatedly bullied others.”

“And after Xia Mingyuan was put under investigation, Wu Yan, He Juan, Li Bing and others spread the word to their classmates and friends in the school.”

“It was because of the interests of his relatives that Xia Mingyuan was put on file for investigation.”

“Through this point, combined with the confessions of Wu Yan, He Juan, Li Bing and others in this case.”

“So we believe that in the absence of objective facts, it is necessary to take into account the interests in the first instance and revoke the first instance judgment.”

On the bench, looking at the evidence submitted by Su Bai, Jiang Feng said expressionlessly: "The collegial panel has already understood this piece of evidence."

“Does the victim have anything to complain about?”

 This piece of evidence is definitely not conducive to the victim from a side perspective.

Of course, Wang Qin also explained it:

“First of all, since this evidence has not yet been authenticated, we believe that the court should not accept it.”

 “There is doubt in the evidence itself.”

"also."

“The minors involved in this case may be mentally immature.”

“So it is easy to summarize Xia Mingyuan’s own guilty behavior as other behaviors.”

  “At this point, there is a display of “false elements”.”

“So we believe that this evidence cannot be used as a case where the victim made a false confession.”

Su Bai: “The evidence can be evaluated after court.”

 “Pursuant to a request for appeal in an application for proceedings.”

“We have already pointed out that the victim Wu Yan and his uncle are involved in this case.”

“He Juan’s uncle is also involved in this case.”

“Among them, the relatives of the two victims involved in this case are involved in an interest.”

  “Is this something that needs to be taken into consideration?”

“Combined with the words of Wu Yan and other victims, it increases the possibility of its authenticity.”

“In other words, the confessions provided by Wu Yan and others are false confessions.”

ˆ Concerning this point of defense, both sides have made it very clear.

Su Bai presented this evidence to show that the confessions of the victims of Wu Yan and others were false.

And Xia Mingyuan was investigated through false litigation.

Wang Qin used the excuses of being underage and ignorant to dismiss Su Bai's point of view.

Whether in terms of evidence or objective facts, Su Bai's reply was much higher than Wang Qin's.

 The defense has now entered an advanced stage.

 Just wait for the relevant judgment from the presiding judge.

 It’s just...

 The judgment this time is based on Jiang Feng’s performance just now.

 It can be clearly seen that the other party is leaning towards the victim.

Su Bai raised his head and looked at the judgment seat.

Jiang Feng slowly opened his mouth after sorting out the relevant materials:

“Both parties have completed their defense on the relevant circumstances of this case.”

 “The decision on the defense is now announced.”

“First of all—the evidence submitted by the appellant has not yet been appraised, so it will not be accepted.”

“Secondly, the court believes that the victim’s confession and related circumstances are reasonable to a certain extent.”

 “The reason is as follows:”

“As a teaching director in the school, Xia Mingyuan can punish students without physical contact.”

“He still used this kind of punishment even though he knew that he was likely to punish students, that there was physical contact, and that he might touch private parts.”

 “It has a certain degree of intentional expressiveness subjectively.”

 “Based on this.”

“He also had multiple physical contacts with the victims Wu Yan, He Juan, and Li Bing, and called them into the office.”

“In addition to his subjective intentionality, it cannot be proven that he has not committed any obscene or harassing behavior.”

“It is now determined that Xia Mingyuan has committed obscene and harassing behavior.”

While the presiding judge Jiang Feng was making the judgment, Su Bai felt that this judgment was outrageous.

 That’s the verdict, right?

 Knowing that it is possible to touch private parts is equivalent to touching private parts?

 No...where did this logic come from?

 Criminal cases, say it 100 times: evidence, direct evidence, objective facts!

At the same time, you can't be sentenced to three and a half years in prison based solely on oral confession and possible intentionality!

Isn’t this scary?

Su Bai directly retorted in court: "What about the objective facts and direct evidence that the presiding judge just based on his judgment?"

"where?!"

“Without objective facts and direct evidence, why should Xia Mingyuan be found guilty of a crime?!”

“I would like to ask which article or provision of the Criminal Procedure Law the presiding judge made his decision in accordance with?!”

Facing Su Bai’s question, Jiang Feng frowned slightly, but still replied:

“This judgment is based on the adapted scenario.”

“Based on the applicable scenario, it means there is no objective factual evidence?!”

 “What is the applicable scenario?”

“Is it based on the victim’s confession or is it a scenario drawn up by the presiding judge based on his own subjectivity?!”

 “I ask the presiding judge to give us a clear explanation!”

Su Bai looked at the seat of the judgment seat and banged the table.

Isn’t this bullying?

At this point, I would definitely not mind breaking up with the presiding judge and members of the collegial panel.

Why?

 Because the other party no longer talks about the applicable laws.

 Applicable scenarios, what legal scenarios are applicable?

If only legal scenarios are used for judgment, what else is there to be answered just now?

Wouldn’t it be better for you to pronounce the verdict right after the court session? !

 Why bother to go through the relevant procedures? !

.

 ….

 PS: Please give me a monthly ticket~

 (End of this chapter)