Recently, a team of defence lawyers composed of Zheng Fei, Li Mingzhen and Wuhan Yangchun from Beijing King&Capital Law Firm finally obtained a formal acquittal verdict for a client suspected of intentional injury after nearly a year of tug-of-war defence. The whole defence process not only shows the limit of defence, extreme defence, evidence defence, professional defence and the charm of the innocent defence, but also reflects the professionalism and dedication of the King&Capital lawyers, as well as the local court and the judge's judicial commitment.
First, the time is urgent limit defence
After the investigation, prosecution and trial before the official opening of the three stages, have failed to effectively resolve the case, the family of the parties in the case of three days before the trial, through the Zheng Fei and Liang Ya Li lawyers edited by the ‘intentional assault acquittal case rules and defence strategy’ book, urgently contacted the team of defence lawyers.
The team decided to accept the commission immediately after careful study and judgement, and went to meet the client thousands of miles away within 3 days to complete the reading of the whole case file, 100,000 words of defence statement, 50,000 words of cross-examination opinions and questioning syllabus, etc., which can be regarded as the limit of defence.
Second, the extreme defence of all-out efforts
Since the case was brought to the court in early March 2024, the judgement was delivered on 30 December 2024, which lasted nearly one year, the defence work was arduous but not humiliating: there were 3 pre-trial meetings, 4 court sessions, 1 consultation with lawyers, 1 invitation to lawyers to participate in the trial committee (it was the first time for the court to invite the lawyers to participate in the trial committee, and was released as a typical case and an important news on its official public number).
The entire trial process, the case of 10 witnesses have 9 appear in court, 1 notification did not arrive, appraisers appeared in court, expert auxiliary appeared in court, the court and the prosecutor's office together with a special trip to consult the provincial forensic science association expert opinion ...... can be said that, in addition to the exclusion of illegal evidence, almost covers all the evidence issues, can be used as a theoretical and practical evidence Analysis of the course of the model, can be described as the ultimate defence.
Third, the defence of the evidence of the silk cocoon
After a careful study of the case file and in-depth communication with the parties, the defence team found that the key to this case is the evidence of the defence: intentional injury of the crime of the four elements of intentionality, conduct, results and causality, the evidence in the case can not prove its establishment. Specifically:
(a) The defendant did not have the intention to injure. This case has a special background of family and business disputes, the staff of the victim's side of the first hand led to the whole conflict; and the scene video and related evidence shows that before the conflict, the defendant actively alarm and report to the community committee, the whole conflict process the defendant only defensive will and behaviour, not active aggressiveness, the evidence in the case does not prove that it has the intention to injure the victim.
(ii) the defendant did not hurt the victim's behaviour. Physical evidence, this case neither the scene investigation, nor collect the tools of the crime, the lack of key physical evidence, resulting in the entire chain of evidence is obviously broken; and in the case of video footage can not directly prove that the defendant has hurt the victim's behaviour. Verbal evidence, the case of three key witness testimony is opinion evidence, should be excluded; coupled with all the verbal evidence in this case there are contradictions and multiple contradictions, on the hit or not hit, with what tools to hit, how to hit, hit to which part, hit the process of whether someone fell to the ground, who fell to the ground, and other key issues, there is a serious conflict of contradictions. Therefore, the evidence in the whole case can not form a complete chain of evidence to prove that the defendant has hurt the victim's behaviour.
(C) the victim's minor second-degree injuries can not be established. Due to the degree of injury identification procedures illegal, identification of the samples used incomplete, unknown sources, can not determine the same, identification process is not in line with the principles of forensic science of complete fracture identification, especially in the absence of key evidence CT, in the case of medical records are not written ‘complete’ fracture, but concluded that ‘complete’ fracture. Complete’ fracture conclusion, objectivity is doubtful. In addition, the appraisal also exists ‘omitted’ medical records and other circumstances, not in accordance with the provisions of the signed power of attorney, in violation of the ‘General Principles of Judicial Appraisal’, ‘Judicial Appraisal of the basic norms of professional ethics’ and other basic requirements. Most importantly, the appraisal organisation had been administrative punishment for the same situation, so according to the identification of minor injuries made out of the second degree does not have the relevance, legitimacy and authenticity of the appraisal, can not be used as the basis for the case, the victim can not be established in the second degree of minor injuries.
(D) from the causality element, not only can't conclude that ‘the victim's injury is caused by the defendant's direct violence,’ the only conclusion, but can conclude that ‘the victim's injury is caused by indirect violence,’ the only conclusion. Because the identification of the mechanism of injury is obviously wrong, contrary to the ‘Surgery’ and other authoritative textbooks recognised forensic principles: the fifth metatarsal bone of the foot is cancellous bone, its fracture is often due to muscle pulling and other indirect violence. According to the dim and chaotic scene video, do not exclude the possibility of the victim's own foot fracture in the course of the conflict. And according to the principle of forensic material transfer, if it is caused by direct violence, the fracture site should be soft tissue damage. But in the case of medical records show no soft tissue damage, only a slightly swollen record, not only does not meet the characteristics of direct violence, on the contrary, in line with the characteristics of indirect violence. In layman's terms, the fracture of the fifth metatarsal bone of the victim's foot could not have been caused by the defendant with a tool.
Comprehensive and detailed professional defence
For intentional injury cases involving the degree of damage and injury mechanism and other issues involving expertise, the defender not only to have their own professional defence skills and specialized knowledge reserves, if necessary, also need to rely on the professional power of the expert auxiliary appraisal opinion for effective cross-examination, in order to make the appraisal opinion of the problem is completely exposed.
In this case, the defence through repeated efforts, successfully applied to the two forensic experts as expert supporters in court, on the appraisal opinion and the appraisal of the expert for in-court cross-examination. The expert auxiliary and the defence closely cooperate, not only with professional and common language will be detailed to the court, but also through the physical model, professional authoritative teaching materials and the Supreme People's Court review letter display, one by one pointed out the appraisal of the error, restore the original face of the case facts.
Especially important is, after the expert aids and defence lawyers, also successfully proved that the defendant is the real ‘victim’! Because the defendant was injured by the so-called ‘victim’ of the degree of injury judicial appraisal is obviously wrong, according to the supreme people's court's reply and the ministry of public security of the human body damage appraisal standard interpretation, should be used coefficient of addition, in full compliance with the standard of light injury second degree. The defendant said in court, will retain the so-called ‘victim’ in this case to follow up on criminal charges and the right of criminal prosecution.
V. Hard-won judgement of innocence
In the end, through the unremitting efforts of the team of defence lawyers, not only to help the court committee and the judge to clarify the prosecution's system of evidence allegations where the error, but also completely and comprehensively negate the facts of the charges, for the client to win the precious verdict of not guilty - the jewel in the crown of the criminal defence!
The court fully adopted the above views of the defence team in the judgement, and one by one detailed description of the four elements of the case, the evidence on the case, as well as the evidence itself, the evidence and the contradictions between the evidence, so as to come to the conclusion that each of the constituent elements have not been effectively proved, and ultimately formally ruled that the defendant is not guilty!
King&Capital lawyers, although in danger, but does not insult the mission, showing the ultimate effort and dedication. I believe that in the future on the road of the rule of law, King&Capital lawyers will, as always, continue to pursue excellence, to live up to the trust.
