A traffic accident case heard by the court of Ninghua County , which attracted attention for a video clip of a defense lawyer "slamming" the presiding judge and saying in court that the party was "pig head".
On November 6, The Paper (www.thepaper.cn) learned from the defense lawyer Zou Lihui that the Ninghua County Court had made a ruling on the case on November 4, allowing the Ninghua County Procuratorate to withdraw the prosecution. The ruling shows that during the litigation, the Ninghua County Procuratorate decided to withdraw the lawsuit against the defendant Wang on the grounds that "the evidence has changed and does not meet the conditions for prosecution."
Previously, on August 22, the Traffic Police Brigade of Ninghua County Public Security Bureau issued a third responsibility determination letter for the case, and determined that the deceased Zhang Moumou had not turned on the left turn light when the vehicle involved was illegally changed lanes on the accident section without obtaining the motor vehicle driving qualification, which also had a direct causal relationship with the accident. Therefore, he was found to be responsible for the same responsibility as Wang Mou.
In June this year, live trial clips of the case were circulated on the Internet. The defense lawyer "slammed" the presiding judge in court and shouted that the parties were "pig heads", which caused heated discussions. Soon after, Zou Lihui, the protagonist of the video and the lawyer of Fujian Yeyang Law Firm, was complained to the Fuzhou Law Association by the Ninghua County Court of Fujian Province. In July, the Ninghua County Court imposed a judicial fine of 1,000 yuan by the Ninghua County Court for "disturbing the court order."
Zou Lihui told The Paper that she was not satisfied with the result and would insist on defending her innocence, or would discuss with the parties and their families to appeal the first-instance ruling.
The first-instance ruling issued by the Ninghua County Court on November 4 allowed the Ninghua County Procuratorate to withdraw the lawsuit. All pictures in this article are sourced: Respondents provide
After the police issued the third responsibility certification, the prosecution withdrew the lawsuit
What made Zou Lihui get into trouble was an ordinary traffic accident case.
On the morning of October 15, 2018, a 30-year-old man named Wang drove a truck and speeded from west to east along Dongda Road to the entrance of the substation of Ninghua Dongda Road. He collided with a two-wheeled motorcycle driving left-turned lane in front, causing the motorcycle driver Zhang to die on the spot. After the incident, the traffic police department made two accident identifications, the first time Wang was determined to be fully responsible, and the second time Wang was determined to be mainly responsible. The trial video shows that the Ninghua County Procuratorate believes that the brake system and steering system of the truck driven by Wang were unqualified, and that he was speeding and hitting a motorcycle, causing the victim to die on the spot, which constituted a traffic accident.
On February 26, 2019, when the case was first heard, the prosecution and defense debated the facts of the traffic story and the division of responsibilities. In his defense, Zou Lihui said that Wang did not know in advance that there was a problem with the truck braking and that the vehicle did not meet the requirements and there was no necessary contact with the accident. "When we found that the motorcycle suddenly turned and changed lanes, Wang took emergency avoidance, but at that time the distance between the two vehicles was only 4.5 to 5.5 meters, and the short-distance steering of the motorcycle was the main cause of the accident."
Zou Lihui said that she had presented multiple recordings in court, questioning the facts and laws that violated the facts and laws when handling the case. After the first trial, the Ninghua County Procuratorate applied for postponement of the trial and obtained the court's approval. On May 30, the case was held for the second time. In response to the question of "forensic favoritism and abuse of power", the investigative agency provided the court with three "scenario statements", saying that the appraisal procedure was not inappropriate. After
, the case took a turn. On November 4, the Ninghua County Court made a ruling on the case, allowing the Ninghua County Procuratorate to withdraw the prosecution. The ruling shows that during the litigation, the Ninghua County Procuratorate decided to withdraw the lawsuit against the defendant Wang on the grounds that "the evidence has changed and does not meet the conditions for prosecution." The Ninghua County Court held that the procuratorate's decision to withdraw the prosecution was in accordance with the provisions of the law, and in accordance with Article 242 of the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China", it ruled to allow the prosecution to withdraw the prosecution.
Zou Lihui told The Paper that the change in evidence refers to the third responsibility determination made by the Traffic Police Brigade of Ninghua County Public Security Bureau on August 22 for the traffic accident involved in the case.The responsibility determination letter shows that the deceased Zhang Moumou did not turn on the left turn light when the vehicle involved was illegally changed lanes on the accident section without obtaining the motor vehicle driving qualification, which also had a direct causal relationship with the accident. Therefore, he was found to be responsible for the same responsibility as Wang Mou.
Zou Lihui expressed her dissatisfaction with this result. She insisted that she did not defend Wang's innocence during the previous two trials, believing that she was irresponsible in the traffic accident, and might discuss with the parties and their families to appeal the first-instance ruling.
The third accident responsibility identification letter issued by the Traffic Police Brigade of Ninghua County Public Security Bureau in August this year
In July this year, after receiving the court's report, the Fuzhou Lawyers Association decided to investigate Zou Lihui, but there is no result so far.
At the trial, the lawyer "strikes" the presiding judge and was fined by the investigation court of the Lawyers Association
Pengpai News noticed that in the video of the second trial of the case, when the trial ended in the last 6 minutes, the presiding judge asked the defendant Wang about the procedural question of whether there was any evidence. Zou Lihui suddenly answered on behalf of the defendant: "The right of the defendant is to make a defense!", saying that "it is enough for us to refute the evidence of the prosecution." Zou Lihui kept interrupting during Wang's final statement stage, and taught him to make an acquittal statement, and shouted to Wang: "You pig's head!"
On November 6, Zou Lihui explained in an interview with The Paper that the presiding judge repeatedly asked the defendant if there was any evidence. He believed that as a defense lawyer, he had the right to remind the parties how to answer. "I said several times in a row that we had no obligation to provide evidence, and he still asked, so I said, 'If you can understand, you will listen. If you don't understand, you will not speak human words'."
Zou Lihui said that when Wang made his final statement, he only answered "requiring a fair judgment from the court", which was different from the defense of her innocence, so she shouted "pig head" in desperation as a reminder. In the end, Wang changed his words in court and made a final statement that "I am not responsible for the accident and demanded that the court sentence me to not guilty."
html In early June, the video clip of Zou Lihui "strike" the presiding judge spread wildly on the Internet, causing heated discussions among netizens.comments are coming one after another: some people believe that lawyers interrupting others' speeches without court permission objectively constitute disrespect for the presiding judge; some people support Zou Lihui's approach, believing that it is to stick to the point of view.
Ninghua County Court issued a "judicial proposal" on June 6, believing that in the trial of Wang's suspected traffic accident, the defense lawyer Zou Lihui "induce the defendant to make a final statement, disobey court command, applaud, insult the defendant, etc. during the trial, which violated the relevant provisions of the court rules. Therefore, she complained to the Fuzhou Lawyer Association and suggested that she be punished or punished accordingly.
htmlOn July 5, Zou Lihui received a case filing notice from the Fuzhou Lawyers Association, saying that the Lawyers Association had filed an investigation into the aforementioned report. During the investigation, Zou Lihui said that her "some of the more intense words and emotional expressions" were a cause. She believed that the fundamental reason was that the presiding judge's improper command and that she objectively did not cause the consequences of chaos in court order or the inability to continue the trial. Up to now, the case is still being handled in accordance with the procedures.Previously, on July 4, the Ninghua County Court made a judicial fine of 1,000 yuan on the grounds that "inconsistent with court command, random applause, spoke without the permission of the presiding judge, insulting judicial staff and litigation participants , etc., which disrupted court order" and "serious circumstances", and was limited to payment before July 22.
Article 199 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that during the court trial, if the litigation participant or the attendant violates the court order, the presiding judge shall warn and stop it. Those who do not listen to the situation may be taken out of court by force; if the circumstances are serious, they shall be fined not less than 1,000 yuan or detained not less than 15 days. Fines and detention must be approved by the President. If the person being punished is dissatisfied with the decision to fine or detention, he or she may apply for reconsideration of to the higher-level people's court . The implementation will not be stopped during the reconsideration period.
Zou Lihui was dissatisfied with the fine and applied for reconsideration to the Sanming Municipal Court on July 11, believing that the Ninghua County Court had wrongly determined the facts and applied the law to him, and requested the revocation of the fine decision. On August 15, the Sanming Municipal Court held that Zou Lihui's application for reconsideration was unsubstantiable, rejected his application and upheld the original decision. Later, because Zou Lihui refused to pay the fine, the Ninghua County Court decided to enforce it on July 23.
