Joke Collection Website - Cold jokes - What is a courtroom debate wolf warrior?

What is a courtroom debate wolf warrior?

How to do a good job in court debate? The first thing is to clarify the strategic goals. Many lawyers often talk about how to conduct court debates during lectures, but I say it from another perspective. First, we must clarify our strategy for court debates. Goals, the strategic goals of criminal defense lawyers are nothing more than four.

Strategies for court debate

The first is the defense of denying the facts. This is the most commonly used defense, factual defense.

The second is qualitative defense. I admit everything, but the conclusion reflected in the case is different from the prosecution. Qualitative defense is the most difficult defense, and factual defense is the most common defense. Qualitative defense must Have a very deep legal foundation, and be able to combine their legal foundation with specific cases, and integrate the general principles and sub-provisions of criminal law. The sub-provisions of criminal law can be compared horizontally between crimes determined by different objects and between injury situations. , can we do a good job in qualitative defense and make it very clear. Not everyone can do a good job in qualitative defense. To convince the court that my point of view is correct, you must have a sufficient theoretical basis.

The third is procedural defense, which is in the ascendant in China. Procedural defense is very miserable. China’s procedural defense courts almost ignore it. However, from the perspective of individual cases and the construction of the rule of law, if lawyers move in unison, it will involve As all procedural issues are constantly being appealed and shouted about, I think the spring of procedural defense will not be far away.

The fourth is the defense of sentencing. Sentencing defense has just started in China. At the beginning of this year, I went to the United States to inspect the U.S. sentencing system. I found that the U.S. sentencing system has been in operation for hundreds of years and is very good. It can completely try a qualitative case into an objective case and completely target a person. The qualitative trial is completely different from the sentencing process. The qualitative trial deals with the matter and not the person. The sentencing process is completely focused on the person and not the matter. What is this person like, good or bad, bad or not? How many children does he have? The need for support, the original background and education of several mothers, etc. It is wrong for this person to be given a harsh sentence. The sentencing procedure is more complicated than the qualitative procedure. In China, our situation is that the court cannot respond to the qualitative defense. In the judgment, it was also said that the defense of XX by the defendant and defender had no factual and legal basis, so this court will not accept it.

This is the case for qualitative defense. The sentencing defense just stipulated is not optimistic at all. These are the three directions of court debate. This is a strategic issue.

Strategy is a matter of direction, tactics are different. Regarding tactics, the first thing to do is to make it clear who to talk to. This is an issue that criminal defense lawyers often fail to grasp. We often see defenders talking affectionately to the jury in foreign qualitative courts, because He knows that the judge does not have the right to vote on the characterization, only the jury does, so he must let the jury know the defense lawyer's main views, factual basis, reasoning principles and methods. It is aimed at the jury. It is clear that the judge can be ignored. There are several things that Chinese criminal defense lawyers do wrong. First, they are more serious with the prosecutor and fail to notice that the judge is whispering on the phone with his head down. Sometimes when the defender is reading his defense statement, we will find that the judge is packing up the case files. , never read aloud, this is the second question.

In addition, you must use your own language. I have seen many local lawyers just read their defense loudly during court debates, using Mandarin or local dialects, and the sound is very loud. This effect is very No, we can prepare a defense statement without any problem, prepare it 200%, express it in your own language in court, and only express 80%, but this 80% is a kind of communication, which is better than what you read. It is 200% more attractive, more influential, and more effective, so you must use your own language according to the circumstances of the trial. People who have been professors and scholars have done very well in this regard. The language organization ability in the court is better, and he always speaks with enthusiasm when talking about the rising points. The language in the scene is more exciting and exquisite than ordinary language.

Finding a way to give yourself this ability is to use your own language to express it in court. This is the second one.

The same goes for the ending. You must be good at summarizing at the end. Without summarizing, there is no height.

The summary includes some of my own reflections. Like the defendant, he has a final statement. In fact, the defender also has a final statement. The defender's last statement is the ending. The defendant's last statement can move the court and impress the judge, and the defender's final statement will also be like this. It's just that you didn't do it well. If you do it well, you will think that the lawyer is good.

Fourth, controversial cases regarding the existence of characterization. What to do with qualitative defense? Make reference to other sources. We found all the general principles and sub-provisions of the criminal law, and compared these related things horizontally and vertically. For different objects and different crimes, what is the difference in the strength and scope of our criminal law? We compared various crimes horizontally. This includes mastering the knowledge of jurisprudence and finding all the cases we can find, especially for prosecutors and judges. We must study our opponent so that we can persuade him in a targeted manner and speak to the depths of his heart. This is very difficult. I can't give a simple introduction under the circumstances of individual cases, but my idea is to control different courts and members by coming up with possible viewpoints and letting them follow my train of thought.

Fifth, understand the situation clearly. We cannot dwell on issues that cannot be resolved by the courts. I won’t go into detail on this.

Sixth, the connection between other defendants in the same case. How to amplify the favorable views expressed by the co-defendant during the debate, and how to praise and praise the views of the defenders of other co-defendants. Grab your own allies to make your team stronger, and join forces to attack the prosecution in turns. The first defendant misses the second defendant and tries to find a way to follow up, make up for it, and fight again. The three defendants tried their best to make up for it and make the team of criminal defense lawyers become a whole.

Seventh, pay attention to the language expression skills in court debates. The use of rhetorical questions, hypothetical questions, metaphors, etc. not only reveals an affirmation of the evidence, a recognition of the facts, and an expectation for the future, but also has an emotional color, allowing the defender to reflect it in the court , it’s not just about a job, but there’s emotion in it. Language skills are very important, as they will reflect a lawyer’s proficiency and ability and arouse more respect.

Eighth, we must comprehensively grasp the principle of combining key points. The so-called comprehensive grasp refers to the first round of debate, including things that are not controversial, at least every detail of the meritorious service, including the background of the defendant and the circumstances of the case. The characteristic of the first round of debate is a derivation process based on the facts of the court's inquiry, evidence and cross-examination, to deduce the conclusion that the defender wants to draw. The second round is the reasoning process. The first round should be comprehensive and theoretical, and the second round should be targeted and theoretical. Regarding the focus, there are some key issues that should be left to the court. We have seen that sometimes the defenders have done their best to prepare and conduct adequate defense and defense, but the prosecutor turned a blind eye.

Ninth, the principle of combining theory and practice. The second round must be targeted and theoretical, otherwise there will be no height in the second round. Targetedness refers to whether you can find the legal weak spots after the accuser’s first round of response. Your theoretical nature determines your punches. Is your strength enough? Does your theoreticalness make the other party think that you are in a lofty position and dare not fight with you? Or is your theoreticalness enough for your judge to understand? Your theoreticalness is such that you can explain the specifics of the case. Events and theories are combined together to explain in depth and even use different cases to convince you of your point of view. The logic and skills of language are very knowledgeable. There is a joke often said in foreign countries: Can you smoke while praying? Absolutely not. Praying is a very serious matter, how can you smoke? But if the lawyer asks, can you smoke while praying? Can you pray? You can pray. Praying is a very noble thing. It is not only when I smoke, but also when I do anything. There is nothing wrong with praying. Therefore, different language rules determine the subsequent results of your skill application.

Tenth, the principle of combining creating a harmonious trial atmosphere with adhering to principles. To create a harmonious court atmosphere, all activities of criminal defense lawyers are to seek a harmonious court atmosphere. Harmony, initiative, and fullness are the court atmosphere we seek. In this atmosphere, the fierce court trial must be turned into a prosecution and defense trial. The three-party seminar on various facts and evidence awakened the rationality of the prosecution and prosecutors, so that our case may have the outcome that the lawyers expected.

We seek to convince the court and the prosecution all the time. We are polite, harmonious, and not wrong. We deal with the matter, not the person. We have turned a blind eye to the prosecution's several impolitenesses, including language, actions, and behavior. , we remained calm and continued our normal court activities. After the third and fourth rounds, the prosecution felt embarrassed, and even the judge did not want to see it. If you want to take action, the prosecutor must consider the facts. This is great. Creating a harmonious trial atmosphere must be combined with adhering to principles. Should we adhere to principles? Because sometimes defenders must argue when they should argue, and they must argue when they should argue. If you don’t argue, you won’t argue. The position of the lawyer and the rights of the lawyer , the role of lawyers and the value of lawyers cannot be realized, we must fight, rights and interests will not fall from the sky to us. 11. Conversation, behavior and inappropriate behavior in court. During court trials, many defenders do not sit properly or stand properly. During cross-examination in court, when the prosecutor is unreasonable, defenders show too much in their expressions. I think barristers should have a refined demeanor, frowning, Do not look like shaking your head, hating, or showing contempt in court. Pay attention to every lawyer's speech and behavior. When I sit in court, I should have the demeanor of a barrister, and every lawyer should look presentable when sitting there.