The sky is always unpredictable, sometimes the trajectory of life will not follow the direction of your planning. A party in this case is the vice president of a provincial school uniform association, plowing the field of school uniforms for more than 20 years. A and a famous women's volleyball coach is a secondary school alumni, over the years, adhering to the "women's volleyball spirit", is committed to creating a first-class school uniform brand. Who expects, in the process of operation of the sudden criminal risk, many years of foundation was overturned. Initially sentenced to thirteen years, through Peng Jiyue, Feng Wang lawyer defense, the sentence was eventually reduced significantly.
A claim that the chain of evidence has been "locked up" case, the party's daughter with the last glimmer of hope came to Beijing to entrust lawyers.
A and his wife engaged in the production of school uniforms for many years. 2014 or so, the two returned to their hometown to invest in factories, because they do not understand the construction engineering and busy with other companies listed, they cooperate with relatives C, D, four together as shareholders to set up the company. The construction of the company's plant are handed over to C, D, A, B is still busy with other enterprises in the field of production and management. In the process of plant construction, due to government policy adjustments, the land involved in the storage, and combined with the company has invested and construction of the compensation given more than 30 million yuan, at the end of the year, the four shareholders according to the proportion of investment each allocated about 2 million yuan.
Afterwards, the public security authorities alleged that part of the piling works existed the phenomenon of substituting the real piling works with landfill residual piles, which was suspected of fraudulently obtaining more than 9 million yuan of compensation from the government by false engineering volume. Therefore, the four shareholders were jointly charged with fraud.
Second, the strange Rashomon: who in the end is lying? In this case, the parties involved in the "good people die in the hands of witnesses" terrible situation
Shareholders C, D does not deny that he hit the fake pile, but unanimously claimed that the idea of counterfeiting is a shareholders meeting in May 2015, the others agreed, they are only responsible for the implementation. A, B but cried injustice, said the construction and storage matters completely by C, D is responsible for, engineering counterfeiting they simply do not know, not to mention what shareholders' meeting was held. What's more, they know nothing about the construction industry, how can I think of "fake pile" so "professional" approach to fraud?
However, c, d of the transcript of the words, for the proposed time, the process of saying "have nose and eyes", seemingly unquestionable. A, B's defense rhetoric earnest, as if also logical, but there is no other evidence to prove their innocence ......
In desperation, a, b's family turn to find the King&Capital law firm, respectively, commissioned Peng Jiyue, Feng Wang lawyers as their own defense.
Third, meticulous reading lock key evidence, found that the contradiction between the financial statements and verbal evidence, prying the whole case
A criminal case, as a medical diagnosis and treatment of difficult cases, different people, there are always different views. Sometimes it will be considered as "lack of skill", and sometimes it will be "withered wood, spring".
At the beginning of the case, the defense listened to family members reflect, case officers said the evidence in this case has been "ironclad", the local defense on behalf of the case under pressure, also tend to choose to plead guilty and accept punishment, the court is also prepared to use a day on the completion of the trial, a quick verdict to close the case. In this regard, the defense has not yet read the file of the heart can not help but drums. However, the defense attorney has a unique advantage over the parties: the defense can be comprehensive, detailed reading of the file, and make every effort to review the evidence system, looking for favorable evidence, which avoids the parties "can not be justified," the dilemma.
Defenders from the case authorities to copy the case file after the start of intensive work. The parties accused of fraud, from the fictitious facts, to the definition of loss, fraud crime accusation logic is complete, on the surface it seems that the alleged fraud crime net woven dense, perfect, no matter from which angle to break through, is tantamount to a bird trapped in the center of the net, all the efforts can only be futile. According to the allegations of the indictment, the key point of the case is a proposal in the shareholders to fake, reading the focus on this issue.
Read the file, not just "read" the evidence, but also comb and analyze the evidence. Read the file is not the case file in every corner of the information without distinction to be examined, because a case of the evidence system is often not "all over the body", the key loophole may be only one or two places. Therefore, with a two-fisted attack is often not as good as a single straight punch, hit the nail on the head. Experienced lawyers, often in the complex case file such as silk such as cocoon, pull out that one or a few key "filaments". There are many ways to read the file, depending on the case. For the core issue of the review of the method of reading the file, you can be certified as the core of the issue, from different dimensions of radioactivity to the outreach of other specific issues, and to verify that there is no evidence to prove. In this case, for example, the proposition to be verified is that A proposed staking falsification at the May 2015 shareholders' meeting. This can be broken down into more minor issues:
When did A propose it? What is the method of falsification and does A have the ability or experience to propose it accordingly? Who was present at the shareholders' meeting? What was the attitude of the rest? Why did no one raise any objections? What was the relationship between the perpetrators and was it sufficient to support a joint offense? How was the work of counterfeiting divided? When did it start? Were others hired to carry out the work? How were they stated in their transcripts? Did the shareholders communicate again during the implementation? How was the distribution of the proceeds of crime agreed upon? How did the counterfeiting behavior progress, and was there any re-communication and coordination in between? How were the benefits distributed in the end? In addition to rhetorical evidence, whether there is objective evidence to corroborate each other ......
Sure enough, through the careful "grid" combing, the defense found a key contradiction: C, D's transcripts consistent statement, A is in early May 2015 shareholders' meeting proposed pile foundation forgery. But a detail in the complicated bank flow shows that in March 2015, C, D paid the first purchase of "salvaged piles", indicating that the two had already begun to prepare for the fake piles. The case instantly became clear: the result could not have happened before the cause, and it was impossible for C and D to prepare the fake materials first, and then A filed a motion to fake! The work of the defense for a period of time is not in vain, once thought to have locked the case of the "chain", as if all of a sudden was cut off.
Fourth, the court battle of wits: defense attorneys through questioning, questioning, debating, gradually narrowing the "circle".
Find the key evidence of contradiction is only half of the success, the important thing is to present it in court. How to present contradictions, without giving others the opportunity to sophistry, need to pay attention to the timing and strategy.
Some lawyers summarize: questioning is like loosening the screws, the debate is like completely screwing down the screws. In the questioning session, the defense first motionless to C, D asked: pre-trial transcript is true, whether to confirm that A is in the shareholders' meeting in May 2015 proposed piling falsification, etc., in order to solidify the content of C, D repeated statements in the previous transcript. C and D will not purposefully explain and sophistically defend themselves on this issue without knowing the purpose of the defense.
During the evidence and cross-examination session, the defense purposely emphasized the bank flow in the case file that a certain payment for the purchase of salvaged pipe piles was made on a certain date in March 2015. At this point, even if C and D discovered the contradiction in their words, it was too late to deny it again.
In the debate session, the defense will ask questions and cross-examination session curing information a comparison, the problem will be very clear: C, D accuses A in May 2015 to propose forgery, but the two of them purchased in March, used for forgery, fraudulent collection of money for the salvage piles. Objective evidence does not lie, who is lying at a glance.
Fifth, originally prepared to "quick judgment and quick decision" one day to finish the case, a wave of twists and turns trial "three years", the second trial prosecutor bluntly, "your comments are very serious, very professional, reasonable, we have recommended that the court remanded for retrial! "
Before the first session of this case, the judge had planned only one day to finish, but as more and more problems in the case were revealed, the hearing one day into two days, two days into four days ...... from New Year's Day opened one after another to the eve of the Spring Festival. However, unfortunately, the case did not achieve good results in the first trial, the two defendants were still both sentenced to thirteen years in prison.
In the second trial, the defense in order to highlight the case issues, the legal opinion will be disassembled, writing a letter "special auxiliary case index", the legal opinion to take the following "point of view + evidence + a brief description of the" approach, so that the complicated facts at a glance, and strive to reduce the case We strive to reduce the cost of case management.
Once, the defense lawyer went to communicate with the prosecutor of the second trial, after reporting his name, the prosecutor warmly greeted him and said, "I know you, I've read your opinion, I've been working for so many years, and I've handled a lot of cases in the second trial, and your opinion is one of the most persuasive opinions I've ever seen!" The prosecutor also said that he would recommend that the court remand the case for a new trial. This situation, for the defense, is like a ray of light among the dark clouds!
Justice and responsible prosecutors have a common characteristic, in the case of accusation of crime evidence, they (they) will "bite the green mountain will not let go", firmly lock the evidence, dutifully accused, for the country, for the people to guard the peace of society. But if the case is found to be doubtful, they (they) will take the initiative to withdraw the sword ready to be sheathed, will not habitually in the program has been running "go with the flow", will not be concerned about personal gains and losses, as the goddess of justice, closed eyes, can not see, and do not want to look at the law and evidence outside the flurry of disturbances, both hands only fair and just! The only thing in both hands is fairness and justice.
Six, after three years of difficult defense, the defendant's sentence was ultimately reduced significantly, this case also gives the majority of entrepreneurs sounded the alarm, when the hands of the cupboard may also be "woe from Heaven"!
After the first trial, second trial, retrial first and second trial four trial procedures, in the two defendants were initially sentenced to thirteen years of imprisonment, the final sentence of six years and eleven years of imprisonment. For a variety of reasons, this case did not achieve the ultimate goal of innocence, although the client expressed full recognition and appreciation of the work of the defense lawyers, but from the defense lawyers on their own requirements, but still not inevitably for a regret!
Importantly, this case is also committed to join forces with others to fight a career of "Chinese partners" have sounded the alarm. How to avoid the liability of other shareholders to implicate themselves, the author suggests the following:
1
To establish a mechanism to convene a shareholders' meeting to discuss major matters, and written minutes of the meeting, set out the content of the discussion, participants, time, it is best to the minutes of the meeting number, to prevent others from claiming that the shareholders' meeting was held but did not form the minutes of the meeting said.
2
Shareholders can not be a hands-off, the company's major matters need to be necessary to understand and review.
3
Standardize the company's financial system, for the company some important accounts or to have a clear understanding of the shareholders of each dividend payments are clearly explained the source.
4
When other shareholders are suspected of committing a crime, they should take timely measures to prevent themselves from being implicated, such as sending letters to the shareholders or calling the police.
