April 1, King&Capital law firm senior partner ZhangYanFeng lawyers, ZhengHuan lawyers received by the two of them on behalf of a sabotage of production and operation of the case of the first instance verdict. In the indictment alleging that more than 1.95 million losses caused by the other party, through the active communication of lawyers, due diligence defense, the case was finally decided that the two parties bear a lower sentence, and one of the period of detention “reimbursement”, in the Qingming Festival holiday (April 2) before the release of the sentence, to return to their families.
Background of the case
After communicating with the family, the lawyer judged that the situation was not optimistic. The main problem is: the alleged obstruction of labor (preventing construction) lasted nearly half a year and caused large losses to the construction side, in which the participants up to more than ten people, in the local caused a certain adverse impact. If according to the crime prosecution standard, causing public and private property loss of more than 5000 yuan; disrupt the production and operation of more than three times or gather more than three people should be filed, the relevant party's sentence is likely to break through the crime of the first grade that is less than three years of fixed-term imprisonment, detention or control, to reach three to seven years of the sentencing range. Further understanding of the background of the case, the lawyer learned that the parties involved in this case are mostly ordinary villagers, a few years ago, the local land acquisition, which is a good thing to improve people's livelihood, but some villagers in the case of resettlement and compensation agreements have not yet been signed by the black forces of illegal demolition. Although the evil forces were thus investigated and dealt with in accordance with the law, there was a delay in negotiating compensation for individual villagers. According to the accusation in the indictment, the parties in this case adopted improper means to protect their rights, and repeatedly prevented the developer from carrying out construction work on the site, which led to the crime.
After understanding the relevant circumstances, the lawyer believes that the case has a reason and the subjective malignancy of the parties is relatively small, taking into account the actual difficulties of the villagers and the previous encounter, the lawyer decided to represent the case, and strive to resolve the contradictions between the parties to safeguard the rights and interests of disadvantaged groups.
The case through
After accepting the commission, the two lawyers were in the first appointment to meet with the parties to understand the situation and interpret the relevant legal provisions. After the case entered the examination and prosecution stage, the lawyers further verified the evidence by reading the file, contacted the prosecutor in time, and put forward pertinent lawyer's opinion. At the same time, in order to minimize the loss of the client, after the case results towards the assessment, the lawyer explained to the client the application of the system of leniency in plea bargaining. After careful consideration, the client was willing to plead guilty and accept the penalty, and the lawyer immediately conveyed this willingness to the prosecutor, and started the negotiation on the sentencing recommendation. At the same time, also made it clear that the conviction and sentencing of this case, will be at the trial stage of the independent defense opinion. Finally, on the last day of the expiration of the period of examination and prosecution, in the witness of the lawyer, the client formally signed the statement. In the trial stage, on the one hand, the lawyer actively collects favorable evidence, through the combing of the time line and the restoration of the conflict scene, to explain to the court that the client there is a blocking reason to assume responsibility, should not be held criminally responsible; on the other hand, the lawyer combined with the background of the case, loss of the determination of the party's attitude of remorse, etc., on the issue of sentencing to issue the defense opinion. In the end, after the panel hearing, the case in the lawyer received the judgment the next day, one of the clients will be released after the sentence. The work of the two lawyers and the outcome of the case was recognized by the clients and their families.
Case Summary
Review, the final sentence reflects the prosecutor and the panel's strict examination of the victim's evidence, the actual damage caused by the determination of reasonable and prudent, and better achieve the effect of the case. However, the lawyer believes that the final verdict still has regrets.
This is a conflict that should not have happened, should not be found guilty. The villagers involved in the case had called the police several times during the period of obstruction and had truthfully reflected the problems they were suffering to the authorities at all levels for help. However, on each occasion, the police did not take any administrative or criminal coercive measures against the villagers, and the replies from the relevant departments did not consider such behavior to be a suspected criminal offense. If, at that time, the police or the relevant departments of the reply, to warn the villagers are committing criminal acts and to stop, then not only can minimize the losses of the construction side, but also to the villagers of the illegal understanding of the wrong correction. But unfortunately, this warning and discouragement in the prosecution of the alleged period did not occur.
Lawyers hereby remind that rights should be taken by reasonable and lawful means, the possible conflicts correctly assess the risk, and actively seek professional help to develop effective solutions. Do not create an irreparable situation due to impulse.
