Becoming a lawyer starts with raising a Xiezhi

Chapter 397 Justifiable Defense
The testimony of Zhang Yong and Wang Yu completely overturned the previous determination of the circumstances of the case. If it was considered excessive defense before, it can definitely be determined as legitimate defense at this time.

And the Xu family didn't even want to admit that they were too defensive, because their request was only one sentence, Zheng Haofeng must be executed because Xu Qiang died.

The public prosecutor knew that the case had undergone major changes, and Xu Zuodong's lawyer knew it too, but Xu's family didn't. They just felt that the testimony of Zhang Yong and Wang Yu was not good for them.

After Zhang Yong and Wang Yu finished their testimony, the judge let them go and brought Zheng Haofeng up again.

Zheng Haofeng didn't know what happened, and still stood there blankly.

The public prosecutor continued to present evidence, but it was all secondary evidence, and Meng Lang did not continue to cross-examine it.When the defense provided evidence, meng lang submitted the collected witness testimony.

These testimonies further prove that Xu Qiang led people to break into Zheng Haofeng's home.

After the presentation of evidence and cross-examination, the court entered the courtroom debate.

First, the public prosecutor shall issue a public prosecution opinion.

At this time, how to express public opinion?Temporarily, there is no way to change the nature of the case, and it can only be determined according to the original public prosecution opinion.

The public prosecutor determined that Zheng Haofeng had a dispute with Xu Qiang and others on the day of the incident, Xu Qiang and others beat him, and Zheng Haofeng stabbed Xu Qiang to death with a sharp knife, violating the provisions of Article 232 of the Criminal Law and guilty of intentional homicide crime, but because Xu Qiang and others have serious faults, they can be given a lighter punishment.

By saying this, the public prosecutor determined that Zheng Haofeng was excessively defensive. Although he could be given a lighter punishment, Zheng Haofeng should still be held criminally responsible.

As for the content of what Wang Yu and Zhang Yong said in court, the public prosecutor believes that the testimony of the two witnesses is seriously inconsistent with the original confession. They have no legitimate reason to retract their confessions, so they should not be accepted, but their previous confessions should be accepted.

After the public prosecution opinion was published, Xu Zuodong’s lawyer said on behalf of Xu’s family: “We believe that the defendant ignored the laws of the country and intentionally killed others to vent his personal anger. It should be found that there was a serious fault, so the defendant should be sentenced to death and executed immediately."

The Xu family is also ruthless enough. They must have wanted the lawyer to say this, otherwise the lawyer would not have said such unskilled words.

Zheng Haofeng glanced at Xu Zuodong's lawyer, then turned his head away without speaking.

After the victim's family finished expressing their opinions, meng lang began to express his defense opinions.

Meng Lang then said: "Guangming Law Firm accepted the defendant's entrustment, and appointed lawyer Niu Zhao and I to serve as defendant Zheng Haofeng's defenders. After reviewing the files in the early stage and today's trial, and considering the evidence of the whole case, we hereby issue the following defense opinions."

Meng Lang made the opening remarks, and then continued: "Through today's trial, we can see that the evidence for the prosecution's accusation of the defendant's intentional homicide is obviously insufficient. There are two types of stab wounds on the victim's body, but only one has been collected so far. One knife, but the other knife was not found. The public prosecution agency believed that the other knife did not exist, which is obviously wrong. Zhang Yong and Wang Yu, who were not involved in the case, proved that two knives appeared on the scene, and both knives stabbed The victim was hit, which shows that the facts of the prosecution's accusation of the defendant's intentional homicide are unclear.

Secondly, this case is obviously a case of self-defense. Although the victim was stabbed to death by the defendant Zheng Haofeng, the defendant caused the death of the victim in the process of eliminating the illegal infringement. Let's see what happened.The defendant, Zheng Haofeng, only participated in the reporting of the victim’s father, which led to the beating of the victim, and the family members of the defendant were injured and hospitalized. During the hospitalization, the victim gathered others to break into the defendant’s house and beat the defendant. All this shows that the victim is not only seriously at fault, but also that his behavior has caused life-threatening danger to the defendant.

The victim led two other people, holding sharp knives, and beat the defendant. In this case, the defendant had only two choices, one was to allow the victim to beat and scold him, or even kill him, or the other was to rise up and resist and eliminate the crime. Illegal infringement of the victim, which one should the defendant choose?

The law protects the weak, safeguards the rights and interests of the weak, and seeks fairness and justice. If a person faces violence and dares not resist, is such a society a fair and just society?Is it a sunny society?

What is the purpose of our justifiable defense legal clause?Isn't it to let everyone dare to stand up and fight against bad people and bad things when facing illegal infringement?

However, in reality, as a person who has been illegally violated, he always has to think about whether he has overprotected himself. If he overdoes it, he will be punished by the law. When facing bad guys, who would dare to talk to them? To wrestle?

The old lady did not dare to help her, the thief did not dare to catch them, and facing the thugs, there was no way to save themselves except calling the police. If things go on like this, what blood and love do we have?
In this case, the defendant Zheng Haofeng took the knife to defend himself in the face of the victim's wanton abuse, which fully complied with the requirements of self-defense. He cannot be liable for intentional homicide just because the victim is dead. Well, then when encountering such a thing in the future, whoever dares to resist will simply die with his arms tied.

Zhang Yong and Wang Yu lied and covered up the facts of the case in order to evade their personal responsibilities in the early stage of the investigation. Now they have discovered the truth of the matter out of conscience, which fully proves that The defendant is innocent and should be acquitted.

Maybe if I say this, the family members of the victim are not happy. Indeed, there are always people who will be unhappy. If you punish the bad guys, the bad guys will definitely not be happy, and our law is not to make the bad guys unhappy?If good people are unhappy, is such a law still necessary?

The presiding judge, judges, public prosecutors, and this defender hope that through the trial of this case, more people will truly realize the fairness of the law and the justice of the law, so that all people can bravely fight against bad people and bad things, instead of Being a shrinking tortoise wiped out the blood of the nation.

Recently, something happened in Yingjiang country. Facing the harassment of bandits, several people from Tao country defended themselves with guns and rose up to resist. They were praised by our national media. When we encounter this kind of thing, if we also stand up If you resist, will you be rewarded?I think this is a question worth pondering. "

(End of this chapter)