Warning: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable in /home/helpmekim2dhsefl3pwmseak8ismo2/wwwroot/wp-content/plugins/ad-injection/ad-injection.php on line 824 Warning: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable in /home/helpmekim2dhsefl3pwmseak8ismo2/wwwroot/wp-content/plugins/ad-injection/ad-injection.php on line 831

It can only be said that many people do not know why they always like to increase the power of lawyers. The civil law system is not like the maritime law system. It can be reversed by winning the sympathy of the jury. In criminal cases, the judicial jurisdiction belongs to the judges, the prosecutors represent the country, and the lawyers merely defend the parties. To put it simply, civil law judges in criminal cases act as judges. From a neutral point of view, prosecutors and lawyers are confronted with each other, and then from both sides’ offenses and defenses, they can freely testify and make judgments based on the facts they have determined. In other words, if any weird verdict really happened, it obviously couldn’t be the lawyer’s fault alone. Either the prosecutor abused public power and was caught by the lawyer, or the judge had a cramp and actually agreed with the defense lawyer’s statement… Again, don’t apply the strange cases of the United Kingdom and the United States to countries with a continental law system. Above, most of the criminal cases in the United Kingdom and the United States are marvelous juries. To be honest, on the one hand, there are prosecutors with public power as the backing, and on the other hand, there are lawyers with only personal power. In any case, the prosecutors have the advantage. Unless there is judicial corruption today, as if there is a huge force behind the defendant who can interfere in the judicial system, and in this case, the prosecutor will be reduced to a lone hero. Otherwise, most of the time, the prosecutor is the one with the advantage. I’m not saying that you can’t scold people when you encounter strange cases, but it is the judge who will make the judgment. In Taiwan, it is the dinosaur judge who scolds the dinosaur judge. I don’t know why the mainland like to scold lawyers? If it is because you feel that the judge is under pressure to make a strange judgment, then among the huge forces that can interfere with the judicial process, lawyers are certainly just insignificant pawns. …Of course, this case is a civil case (saying I originally saw the “defense lawyer” and the “bad guy” in the answer, I thought it was a criminal case), so it is understandable that it will arouse controversy. However, although compared with criminal cases, the status of both lawyers in civil cases is more equal, and the strength of the defense team is indeed different due to differences in wealth (the degree of understanding of the law, the mastery of theories, the understanding of court proceedings, and judicial practice, etc.). However, it is still not objective to criticize the defendant’s lawyer just because of this. After all, under the civil law system, the trial of the case is within the scope of discretion, according to the freedom formed in the offense and defense of the plaintiff’s agent and the defendant’s agent. Evidence for judgment. In other words, the judges of the cases are always judges, and the lawyers are ultimately contestants rather than judges. After all, what is the reason for the design of the lawyer system and the structure of the judicial system itself? To speak the vernacular, the reason is actually very simple, because there is no omniscient judge in this world. Everyone, no matter how extraordinary, they can neither have the “omni-knowledge” ability to understand the full picture of the facts, nor can they have the perfect ethical, moral, complete, impartial, neutral and objective judgment to make absolute justice after knowing the full picture of the facts. The “all-around” power. In this case, it is bound to be unable to give a certain person or a certain group the position of being responsible for the full trial. So how can “relative justice” close to “absolute justice” be obtained when “absolute justice” cannot be obtained? After countless scholars’ discussions and practical practices, human beings have gradually divided the trial into an expert with different responsibilities. Some of them are in charge of investigation and prosecution, some are in charge of trial, and some are in charge of defense. Each person performs his or her own duties and works according to their own responsibilities. The person in charge of the prosecution seeks evidence to sue the other party, and the person in charge of defense is responsible for checking whether the prosecutor’s procedures are legal. Is the investigation legal? The person responsible for the trial is in the case of the prosecutor and the defender confronting each other, trying their best to find evidence or questioning the evidence, maintaining order like a referee, determining whether the two parties have violated the rules, and in accordance with the evidence generated after the attacks and defenses of both parties , Facts, relying on their own free opinion, trial within the discretion granted by the law. This procedure is certainly not perfect, but at least it is closer to “truth” and “justice” than expecting a certain “omnipotent and omnipotent” saint God to judge all right and wrong with absolute authority.


By zhiwo

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Notify of
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
7 months ago

1. From the perspective of a legal person, I must feel that the curse is unreasonable. They are all legal professions. They do what they do within the scope of the profession, and there is the possibility of mutual transformation. For example, many judges and prosecutors resigned to become lawyers. A former classmate who worked in the prosecutor’s office before, one of the top ten public prosecutors, fought against crimes before resigning. After two years of resignation, he became a lawyer and actively defended the rights of the client. All were acquitted. Once we chatted, because the effect of defending a drug dealer was good, many drug dealers in the detention center where the drug dealer was detained came to him for his defense. 2. From the lawyer’s point of view, this kind of controversy has long been expected to happen, and the response of the media has already been prepared. No matter how bad people are, as long as they have enough money, it is not a problem for lawyers. Scum like Wang Zhenhua molested a child, and Chen Youxi also defended his innocence. You say for justice? This must be nonsense. When you make this money, you know you will be scolded, but as long as the money is in place, you will be scolded. Even in some cases, as long as the influence is in place, being scolded can also increase visibility. If you can’t even listen to this little gossip in this business, don’t take this kind of case if you don’t have the ability to resist pressure. 3. From the perspective of the public, which profession can’t be scolded, is your lawyer industry expensive? Some time ago, because of the boycott of Nike, some people ran to the live broadcast room to scold other anchors. 4. What do you think? Everyone has different positions, and don’t expect anyone to convince anyone. After all, it is not logic and data but position that determines most people’s views.

7 months ago

Apart from the fact that this is a civil litigation case, let me first talk about the criminal defense system that many netizens will abuse when they come up. Professor Chen Ruihua mentioned the five stages of the development of the criminal defense system in his paper “Empirical Research on the Reform of the Criminal Defense System” published in the “Politics and Law Forum” in November 2019. Among them, “lawyer’s effective defense” is a concept of divergent opinions. What is lawyer’s effective defense? According to this concept, suspects and defendants should obtain effective legal assistance from lawyers. The meaning of effective legal assistance can have the following four aspects: one is a qualified and competent lawyer; the other is adequate and targeted defense preparation; the third is an appropriate defense thinking and defense strategy formed through consultation with the client; the fourth is Effective defense methods and methods of operation. (It does not include the “insults from netizens”) On the one hand, those institutional arrangements that regulate lawyers’ defense activities have prompted lawyers to assume more obligations for performing their defense duties. Since 1996, my country’s Criminal Procedure Law has given lawyers the opportunity to provide legal assistance in the pre-trial stage, and has also expanded the space for defense in the exercise of the right of meeting, reviewing files, and investigating. This is not only a system guarantee for the rights of lawyers, but also a legal requirement for lawyers to provide more, more adequate and timely legal assistance. In particular, the 2012 Criminal Procedure Law establishes a system that lawyers “have the right to verify relevant evidence” when meeting their clients from the date of review and prosecution, allowing lawyers and clients to exchange, discuss, and negotiate on case evidence, which is vital for activation The client’s defense ability, urges the lawyer to fully communicate with the client, and encourages the lawyer and the client to form a joint defense force, which can produce positive results. The regulations for lawyers handling criminal cases adopted by the National Lawyers Association in 2017 further require lawyers to choose defense ideas from the perspective of benefiting the client, and not to defend against the client, and even require lawyers to negotiate with the client on defense ideas. Try to eliminate differences in defense views. This obviously puts forward higher demands on lawyers’ defense, prompting lawyers to provide the most adequate legal assistance from the standpoint of favoring clients. Not only that, in the design of the lawyer management system, such as establishing an access system and exit mechanism for legal aid lawyers, increasing the appropriation of legal aid funds, gradually implementing the lawyer agreement fee system, removing administrative restrictions on the amount of defense lawyers’ fees, and improving The handling mechanism for client complaints to lawyers, etc., also reflect the concept of effective defense from the perspective of strengthening the client’s control mechanism on lawyers. On the other hand, in order to realize the concept of effective defense, the Criminal Procedure Law continues to require investigative agencies, procuratorial agencies, and courts to undertake more obligations and create basic system guarantees for lawyers to fully exercise their defense rights. To a certain extent, in order for a suspect or defendant to obtain an effective defense, it is necessary for the above-mentioned national specialized agencies to undertake the obligation to ensure an effective defense, and the two are in a complementary relationship. In order to ensure that lawyers can effectively exercise their right of defense, the 1996 Criminal Procedure Law established the “defensive trial method”, which reduced the possibility of judges forming prejudices in court, introduced a cross-examination mechanism, and played the role of court trials; the law was established for the first time The principle of uniform conviction by the court has been established, the criterion of never suspected crime has been established, and the procuratorial agency shall be obligated to prove the facts of the prosecution. Without these legislative advances, it would be difficult for lawyers to play an active role even if they defend adequately. The 2012 Criminal Procedure Law resolved the problems of “difficulty in meeting” and “difficult to read files”, giving lawyers the right to meet with suspects in custody without barriers, ensuring lawyers’ comprehensive right to read files from the review and prosecution stage, establishing rules for exclusion of illegal evidence, and establishing witnesses and appraisers to appear in court The testimony system, standardize the applicable conditions for second-instance hearings, and gradually allow lawyers to submit defense opinions to judges during the death penalty review stage. These reforms provide more space for lawyers to engage in defense activities and help lawyers to strengthen their defense effects. Experience has shown that every progress made in the direction of democratization and scientificization of the criminal procedure system in our country has created institutional prerequisites for the effective defense of lawyers. Why do you put aside the familiar concepts of “presumption of innocence”, “anyone should be regarded as innocent before being convicted,” and “the right to obtain a defense in accordance with the law” that legal people usually put forward? This is because the right of criminal suspects and defendants to obtain criminal defense in accordance with the law has basically been guaranteed. The legal system obstacles to criminal defense legal aid systems and criminal defense lawyers’ entrustment have basically been eliminated. However, the distance between obtaining the right of criminal defense in form and the effect of criminal defense in substance is probably a reality that is more worthy of our attention and observation. The reality is that most criminal suspects and defendants have obtained the law in form. Aid and the defense of the defender, but the effectiveness of the defense process is greatly compromised due to various subjective and objective factors. Whether it is interviews, file review, or court trials, all things are made difficult. This is a reality that deserves more attention. After talking about the theory and talking about the reality, this is a civil lawsuit, so there is no defense lawyer, but only an agent ad litem. Civil entities are qualified to entrust a practicing lawyer to represent civil litigation. Netizens who abuse lawyers will not see my answer, so I can say with confidence. In my opinion, no matter whether there are any netizens insulting or not, it is not that I am condescending. To be honest, 99.99% of netizens will never do it in this life. Knowing who Chen Ruihua is, he doesn’t even care about what papers he published in which journal, what the papers express… Why is this? Because they are not insulting lawyers out of simple justice, simple justice also requires at least “justice.” Where can emotional insults have any shadow of justice? It is a very sad thing for a person to become the product of emotions, and it is precisely because they only saw a few words that they began to outrage and blurt out unqualified words. The people who observe the phenomenon, analyze the process, research results, and express their opinions practically and practically are the ones who are really influencing the progress of the times. The people are indeed the masters of the times, but the netizens who represent backward concepts are not. This part of the concepts is backward. Netizens are only a small part of the backward power of the people. They abuse lawyers now, judges will be abused in the future, and legislators will also be abused in the future.

7 months ago

If people like to scold, how old are you? If scolding is not in line with the spirit of the law, then you accuse others of scolding is not in line with the spirit of the law. Is that also not in line with the spirit of the law? If you are in line with the spirit of the law, you should let the scolded person file a complaint. How can someone criticize with moral weapons, you should criticize them with moral weapons disguised as laws. When someone scolds someone, they scold someone. How about you scolding someone? Isn’t it shameless to build a memorial archway? The point is that this is unnecessary? Swearing is not a particularly shameless thing in the first place, so why do you have to find ways to modify your shamelessness? I think ninety-nine percent of human beings are born with an asshole side. Acknowledge that you are not shameless as a bastard, and you are afraid to cover it up. People have already seen from your fingers covering your face that you are LSPs, you have to say that I didn’t see them. Although it’s a shame, it’s shameless. When you talk about law, you talk about law, and when you talk about morality, you talk about morality. You can say that the morality of the law is neither legal nor moral. why? Because morality is subjective and law is objective. How can it be possible to ask everyone to be objective? Even if it is a lawyer, it is not the same as receiving money to serve the employer. Is it different that he is subjective? Some people insist on saying that the Japanese precedent may be a collusion between lawyers and prosecutors. The problem is that the lawyer in question has used objective technology and legal procedures to achieve his goals subjectively? Do you think it’s right for a lawyer to completely protect the interests of the employer, but how can it be wrong to completely maintain order and justice? Isn’t it the lawyer who used his own subjective thinking to interpret objective events? This logical speculative ability is really no one, it will only be black and white. Let me spit again, some people. I like some high concepts that I don’t know, and a few words hit my forehead, as if it has realized universal value, the nobility of the world, and the peace of the world. Actually? You have to figure out that all high-level concepts are designed to make you unable to understand and monopolize the right to speak. Professional nouns are professional nouns, and to impose a concept is to impose a concept. Some things are not like that, just like the legal morality that some people say, empowering the fairness of human society. is it possible? impossible. There are misunderstandings and misunderstandings in the rich elements of the video. No matter how well the legal provisions are written, they can be interpreted from various angles, coupled with the excavation of precedents, appeal to human relations, and political correctness. There are more aspects that can be explained. Coupled with the personal preferences of the judge, such as the Sichuan miemen case. This is a very typical incident that distorts the spirit of law. If the general morality of the society does not criticize, shut up according to the wishes of these people. So the American defenders for the rich are a lesson for the past. You have to make it clear that these people like to confuse professional ethics with general social ethics. Confusing interpretation of provisions with respect for the spirit of the law. If you don’t understand these relationships, don’t dance around some high concepts. Ordinary people are inspired by some people, and they want to change from public to private happily. I haven’t experienced a period of social harmony.

7 months ago

It’s weird, where’s the defense lawyer for civil disputes. In civil cases, they are called attorneys, and in criminal cases, they are called prosecutors and defense lawyers. So whoever thinks that “defense lawyers” exist, do they do not understand the law or do not understand the situation at all, or do they pronounce judgments in their heads? In the case of representing lawyers instead of prosecutors, the attorneys can even throw out their opinions without telling the evidence. Of course, is it true? Being accepted, this is another matter, but they can indeed speak less evidence than the prosecutor.

7 months ago

If Tianli can tolerate (Liu Xin is not guilty), he will not be Jiangge (too self-sacrificing), and Liu Xin will not be friends (too selfish); if Tianli is hard to tolerate (Liu Xin is guilty), he will not be Liu Xin (involved) Others), friends must make Jiangge! I don’t know what the lawyer thinks. Maybe it’s for money or professional ethics? But she actually chose to do it, and was spurned and cursed a few words, she herself should have been mentally prepared long ago. Two more: I like Li Haoyuan very much. As a lawyer, he said: “Just like Teacher Luo Xiang said, some people have learned the law too well, and they have all learned common sense. To be a human being, first be a human being, and then you can control the world. You want to go beyond the world, stand on the peak and look into the red dust. You see that you are also in the red dust. I can only say that I may be impulsive, reckless, and make mistakes, but my emotions It allows me to pursue the goodness of this world and live a life worth living. “I don’t know the law, but like Haoyuan, my emotions make me pursue the goodness of this world.

7 months ago

The comment area is very exciting. There are certain reasons for all kinds of opinions whether they are opposed or supported. Thank you for your corrections and opinions. Regardless of whether it is the starting point for Liu Xin to be a lawyer for fame and fortune, or the starting point for “maintaining procedural justice”, the minimum proposition I always insist on is that criticism and insults are not the same in nature, and they have a sense of morality. Coercive abusive curses, such as the death of the whole family or the remarks with a lawyer as the center of the circle, are very undesirable. Of course, if the turmoil intensifies, it is very likely that the personal safety of the lawyer’s private information will not be protected. This is what I worry about and object to. As an international student, I understand Jiang Ge’s mother and daughter’s situation very well, and I feel incredible and contemptuous of Liu Xin’s actions. Thank you everyone for not personally attacking each other when arguing.

7 months ago

Those who wronged you know better than you how wronged you are. Similarly, in a lawsuit, especially this kind of life lawsuit, who knows the defendant’s guilt best? He knew this better than the defendant. The defendant may not know what his actions mean, but as a lawyer, he knows that he needs to find excuses, take advantage of loopholes, and find legal loopholes to help this person on the premise that he knows all the criminal acts of his defender. So, why can’t you scold me? Or does it mean that scolding him would interfere with the fairness of the judicial process? Then the justice was too bad, and the lawyer was disturbed by scolding twice.

7 months ago

It’s a good scolding. I have been a lawyer for so many years, and I can’t figure out the basics, and I still have the face to take this kind of work. Then, give full play to the art of inverting black and white, and make a plea for innocence. Wouldn’t the conscience hurt? Earning this kind of money, eating this kind of food, and defending such a person would really be cursed by the person next to him. I think it is for fame and fortune. If you don’t believe it, you can see if she will use this case as her propaganda point in the future. To put it conscientiously, there are no lawyers who do not follow the relationship and the back door. The law circle is a wolf society in sheep’s clothing.

7 months ago

First correct the concept. In criminal proceedings, the defendant’s lawyer is called the defender, that is, the defense attorney. In civil proceedings, he becomes the attorney. Liu Xin’s lawyer is called the defendant’s agent in court. Secondly, this question is the same as “Why would anyone be willing to act as defense lawyers for wicked people, including corrupt officials”. To sum it up, there are three points. Everyone has the right to defend. Everyone should receive a fair trial and make money in cases. People who love the house and the wu will also hate the house and the wu. Netizens have cursed Liu Xin for a long time, and Liu Xin is estimated to be invincible. Netizens are also boring. Those who can be scolded are scolded, and those who should be scolded are also scolded. , I really can’t think of how to scold or scold, but the anger of netizens against Liu Xin is still raging, and it lasts for a long time. As Jiang Ge’s mother’s lawsuit has set off one wave after another, Liu Xin’s agent’s Appeared and found a new target for netizens to vent. Since there is nothing new in scolding Liu Xin, then scold Liu Xin’s agent. In a sense, the agent is sometimes backed up. Although lawyers provide clients with legal services, they often go beyond the scope of legal services in practice. Netizens start by condemning the death penalty, and a few curses are nothing. It is estimated that Liu Xin’s attorney had anticipated this situation before accepting the entrustment, and that he dared to accept the entrustment showed that he was fully psychologically prepared. In addition, those netizens who scolded Liu Xin’s agent, if one day they encounter a situation similar to that netizens can kill, and they seek legal help from a lawyer, what should they do if they are afraid of being scolded and are unwilling to accept the commission? Some people firmly say that they will not encounter the above-mentioned situations. Behind the keyboard and the screen, everyone can become a saint. In real life, everyone is a mortal, and it is possible for a mortal to encounter the above-mentioned situation. Do you know that today’s tolerance to others is not the tolerance left to yourself tomorrow?

7 months ago

I have answered enough of this kind of questions and the number of likes is high enough, but the status of related questions has not changed at all. Today, I no longer want to publicize and correct the nature of lawyers’ work, the lawyer’s defense purpose, and the lawyer’s unspeakable ways. The notion that “lawyers provide legal services to the most wicked people is helping the evildoer” is original and powerful, and no popular science can stop the overwhelming and plain public opinion. If you want to scold, just scold it. Since you can’t stop what you do, it’s better to enjoy the unavoidable pain. It’s just that you need to be careful, and you must pay extra attention to scolding lawyers. What does a lawyer do? It is his job to prosecute, and doing a case is like eating a meal. Some lawyers are more genuine, and can even sue the railway bureau for a penny and iQiyi for an advertisement. Political and law students who have not graduated can file a lawsuit for a ticket. The school will support them and explain to the society. Said this is the legal right of students. In other words, they are the most skilled and proficient group of people who want to fight against crimes. Netizens have to be really hard to vent their anger, ordinary insults, yin and yang weird and satirical for a few days, it’s fine if they don’t like to talk about it. If you get emotional and scold a lawyer on the Internet to be half-dead, damage others’ reputations, interfere with others’ normal work and life, and the circumstances are serious, you will be embarrassed. Infringements on reputation rights are minor. Lawyers backhand, insults and defamation are waiting you. In the early years, there was a blogger on Weibo who was not a lawyer, but he was insulted by a large number of netizens. He was also a good player. He picked a few of the most ruthless netizens and asked for an apology. Otherwise, he would let his lawyer file a lawsuit. Several people were frightened, and begged for forgiveness overnight. Even legal practitioners like me who are not yet attorneys who are insulted by someone on the Internet will immediately try the speed of filing a case on the official website of the local court. If you scold you for learning a small language, people can scold you in a foreign language; if you scold you for learning logistics, you can no longer receive express delivery (why is a black home?); if you scold you for learning sports, you can get a crit (is it too late to add a dog head); Scolding a lawyer? Are you okay and want to sit in jail? The scolding netizens looked fierce, and as soon as you bend down to pick up the stones, they dared not scream anymore and ran away without a trace. Coincidentally, the lawyer doesn’t even have to bend over. They have dog sticks in their hands.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x