You became a lawyer and sent the judge in?

Chapter 323: Classic question, you have no intention of killing anyone, why do you say that?
Trial.

Su Bai and Li Xuezhen were brought into court for trial by relevant staff.

All parties are seated.

Regarding Fang Rufeng's case.

All parties entering the court have their own preparations for the outcome of this case.

On the bench, as the presiding judge, Lin Fengru's eyes fell on the appellant's seat.

Then he withdrew his gaze, and a plain voice sounded in the courtroom:

"The above-mentioned person, Fang Rufeng, believed that the judgment of the first instance court was wrong and filed an appeal."

"This case is handled by our court's Shadu Intermediate Court, which is responsible for hearing the retrial application filed in Fang Rufeng's case."

"The prosecution crime filed by Fang Rufeng is preparation for the crime of intentional homicide."

“Now please state the appellant’s reasons and relevant factual evidence.”

"Good judge."

Su Bai nodded and began to entrust a lawyer as the appellant to state the appeal request:

"Our above-mentioned opinion is that we do not agree with the judgment of the first instance judgment on our client."

"The reasons are as follows:"

"Criminal preparation should be based on Article 22 of the Criminal Law as a tool to prepare for crime and create conditions, which is crime preparation."

"Furthermore, according to the understanding and application of the express provisions in the criminal law, preparation for crime must meet four conditions -

One: Subjectively for the purpose of committing a crime.

[-]: Objectively committing criminal preparatory behavior.

Three: In fact, no crime was committed.

Four: The failure to commit the crime is caused by reasons other than the will of the perpetrator. "

“The application of criminal preparation must be based on the above four conditions.”

"Presiding judge, let me first state the facts of the situation here."

"The facts of the situation at that time are - our client discovered that Xie Tingting was cheating on his wife, and out of anger, he expressed the idea of ​​killing Xie Tingting."

"In this case, our client objectively did not commit the crime in preparation for the crime."

"In addition, our client had a big fight with Xie Tingting, and Xie Tingting returned to her natal family."

"Then we called the police and filed a case. During this process, we did not do anything else."

"There are no preparatory facts or conditions for the crime, that is, it does not constitute the necessary conditions for the preparation of the crime."

"Based on the above, we believe that the first instance verdict should be revoked and we should be acquitted."

"The chief judge and above are our above-mentioned requests."

Su Bai made a simple statement.

Immediately afterwards, Lin Fengru, as the presiding judge, turned to look at the prosecutor and victim seats at the trial table.

"The collegial panel has heard the application and demands of the above-mentioned people, and now the prosecutor is invited to make a relevant statement on the case."

"Good judge."

Prosecutor Wu Chunmei nodded and spoke.

Wu Chunmei, as the prosecutor in the first trial, continued to press charges in the second trial this time.

certainly.…

This time, Su Bai did not apply for recusal because he felt it was completely unnecessary.

When Xu Bo was a prosecutor, Su Bai applied for recusal because this was an unjust, false and wrong case.

It can be seen from the files at that time that Xu Bo was very extreme in the accusation.

The statements made by Wu Chunmei in the first-instance file are relatively objective.

The objectivity mentioned here is the objectivity expressed in law.

Wu Chunmei continued to state: "The prosecutor accused Fang Rufeng and the other party Rufeng to initiate a public prosecution."

"The main reason is to take into account the real situation, and the prosecutor believes that the appellant's statement is not comprehensive."

"So here's the supplement."

"Replenish--"

“In this case, based on the situation just stated by the appellant.

The statement of innocence is achieved by the fact that there was no objective preparatory act to commit the crime. "

"But actually, as a prosecutor, I followed law enforcement as they conducted discovery and all aspects of this case."

"After Fang Rufeng learned that his wife Xie Tingting had cheated on her, many search keywords were found on his mobile phone."

"For example: What should I do if my wife cheats?"

"If I kill my cheating wife, or my mistress and my wife, will I be sentenced to death?"

"This kind of keyword proves that Fang Rufeng wanted to deliberately kill his wife Xie Tingting."

"And through the above two searches, it can be confirmed from the side that Fang Rufeng is objectively carrying out criminal preparations."

"Combined with what Fang Rufeng said before Xie Tingting left, I will kill you."

"Based on the above, it can be considered that Fang Rufeng's behavior met the conditions for criminal preparation."

"It does not conform to the description of the lawyer appointed by the appellant. There are no objective facts to prove that Fang Rufeng is committing criminal preparations."

"So the prosecutor's opinion in this case is to reject the appellant's application for innocence."

“The original judgment of the first instance is upheld.”

Su Bai understood the situation stated by the prosecutor.

How can we say that the subjectivity of intentionality is determined by searching for this keyword...

It's very vague... This judgment is usually determined by the law to determine that Fang Rufeng has the subjective intention to commit a crime.

However, if this is classified as an objective preparatory act of committing a crime.

Very far-fetched!
Why do you say that?

Then we need to understand first, what does crime preparatory behavior usually refer to?
Usually refers to mobility.

In this case, mobility refers to preparing knives or other killing tools.

Of course, search can also be used as certain evidence as a judgment condition.

But searching what to do if your wife cheats on you, or whether you will be sentenced to death if you kill someone, is not an action.

If Fang Rufeng is searching, how should I kill my wife without leaving any trace?

What kind of knife can be used to attack to achieve the purpose of killing quickly.

Such a search situation can completely determine that criminal preparatory behavior has been objectively carried out.

why?
Because this kind of search is about how to kill people.

But what is Fang Rufeng’s search?
Fang Rufeng's search was whether he would be sentenced to death after killing someone, and what to do if his wife cheated on him.

From this point, it can be clearly seen that he only has this aggressive tendency subjectively.

There was no objective preparation for committing a crime.

If this kind of search can be judged as objective fact.Su Bai could only say that this might be the first of many cases he had come into contact with.

One more thing - from a rational point of view, the first thing Fang Rufeng searched for was what to do if his wife cheated on her.

If you really kill someone, will you be sentenced to death?

Based on these two points and the environment at that time.

Fang Rufeng was in a situation where he was angry about his wife's cheating, but also rational.

Therefore, Su Bai did not agree with the prosecutor's statement and raised his hand to refute:
"We do not agree with what the prosecutor has stated."

"The content searched in the search bar does not constitute the objective fact of committing a crime preparation act."

"What is preparation for committing a crime?"

"There are clear provisions in the criminal law that preparing tools and creating conditions are preparations for a crime."

"First of all, Fang Rufeng did not prepare tools and manufacturing conditions. Secondly, the content of Fang Rufeng's search is not related to preparing tools and manufacturing conditions."

"Based on these two points, how could the content he searched objectively prepare for committing a crime?"

"Totally unreasonable and inconsistent with the interpretation provisions of the law."

“Presiding judge, we apply to reject the prosecution’s relevant statements.

"And the application stated by the prosecutor, based on the search content, that Rufeng was objectively prepared to commit a crime, will be rejected!"

"The above is our rebuttal."

Among the Four Necessary Conditions of Preparation for Crime.

The most important thing is that it depends on whether criminal preparatory behavior has been objectively carried out.

Both Su Bai and the prosecutor focused their arguments on this content.

Because based on these four conditions, if it is determined that Fang Rufeng objectively committed criminal preparatory acts, then this case will be lost again.

After Su Bai finished his statement, Xu Xia, the attorney appointed by the injured party, raised his hand.

"Presiding judge, we completely disagree with the views of the appellant's attorney..."

Presiding Judge: “Please state the relevant content.”

"Presiding Judge, we believe that this case must be viewed from a specific and objective perspective."

“Start from an objective situation.”

"Did Fang Rufeng express his desire to kill Xie Tingting?"

"Are you searching for ideas on what to do if you kill Xie Tingting?"

"These two points can completely conclude that Fang Rufeng does have murderous thoughts and actions."

"also."

"Fang Rufeng can clearly see from the search that he is already within the scope of the operation."

"It's just that Xie Tingting called the police in time to file a case, which caused Fang Rufeng to be unprepared."

"A little more."

"The affair of cheating was a very humiliating thing for Fang Rufeng."

"In this case, it is common for Fang Rufeng to have the subjective intention to kill."

"And Fang Rufeng's behavior was a very angry situation."

"...It was just that he was called to the police and the preparations for the crime were forcibly terminated. This is the true situation of this case."

"So we do not agree with the statements made by the lawyers appointed by the above-mentioned parties."

"At the same time, the verdict of Fang Rufeng guilty is also to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the woman and avoid Fang Rufeng's intentional homicide."

Su Bai:? ? ?
Is there something wrong with your statement?

This case is discussed in terms of punishment in the context of preparatory crime.

But from the perspective of the victim's attorney, Xu Xia, it is entirely from Xie Tingting's perspective.

In response, Su Bai said: "According to the lawyer appointed by the injured party, I would like to ask a question."

"Is your explanation that Fang Rufeng had the idea of ​​​​killing someone but was stopped during the preparation process? But is it also considered a crime preparation?"

Xu Xia remained silent and did not respond.

Seeing this, Su Bai continued to speak:
"Then let me ask again."

"If we follow your statement, we can understand this case."

"During the search, Fang Rufeng asked whether killing the mistress and the cheating woman would result in the death penalty."

"According to the search content, the other parties are two people. In this case, does it mean that Fang Rufeng made criminal preparations to kill two people?"

"Then what exactly did he do in preparation to kill these two people?"

"Will the search result in a death sentence?"

"Just searching won't hurt Xie Tingting and her cheating man, right?"

"Then why, or how to make a judgment?"

"Just like you, Lawyer Xu. I told Lawyer Xu at the court hearing today that you will definitely be involved in crimes committed due to your duties in the future."

"I privately searched for ways to frame others for official crimes."

"In this case, is Lawyer Xu going to call the police to arrest me for framing others, causing others to be falsely accused?"

“But what did I do in the process?”

"I didn't do anything. I just made a simple statement and searched online for how to frame others for official crimes."

"Can I be judged to have committed a crime when I didn't do anything?"

"I would like to ask Lawyer Xu to answer my question head-on."

Faced with Su Bai's question, Xu Xia remained silent.

There is really no way to answer the other party's question, and if you answer it, you will fall into a deeper routine.

Xu Xia knows that the judgment of this case lies with the presiding judge, not with the opposing lawyer.

Just stay silent.

At the trial table, Lin Fengru frowned slightly after listening to the arguments from both sides.

She had a clear understanding of this case after repeatedly watching the first-instance verdict.

only.…

Su Bai raised this point of view, which is equivalent to saying that he does not agree that the search is an act of objective preparation for a crime.

Regarding this point, Lin Fengru asked:
"The search content proposed by the lawyer entrusted by the above party is not equivalent to the objective preparation of a crime."

"Then why did Fang Rufeng search for these contents?"

"Can the lawyer appointed by the above party or the appellant give a reasonable explanation?"

???

Su Bai was stunned for a few seconds at the presiding judge's question.

No, what question is this TM asking?
This is not equivalent to the classic question——

If you don’t want to kill someone or make preparations, why are you searching like that?
.
....
PS: Please give me a monthly ticket~
(End of this chapter)