In a case of deliberate destruction of the village's collective finances, the lawyer had to investigate several witnesses present. After contacting the village committee, the village committee personnel were summoned to the village department. When the lawyer saw that everyone who should have come, he conducted a symposium-style investigation to understand.
Some people said that this was the situation, some people said it was that situation, some people said it was that situation, some people said, "Oh, I only knew it was after listening to you." The witnesses were all farmers, and after talking for half a day, some of them asked to go home and cook. Time was tight, so the lawyer immediately drafted a witness testimony and asked every witness present to sign and fingerprint confirmation.
After this evidence was submitted to the court, the prosecutor challenged the legality of the evidence, because according to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the questioning of witnesses should be carried out individually, so in the form of a collective meeting, so many witnesses jointly issued a testimony, which was formed illegally, did not meet the requirements of criminal evidence, and could not be admissible as evidence in this case.
The Court upheld the Prosecutor's opinion, rendering the defence counsel's investigation useless.
![Who pressed the 19 handprints on the "waiver resolution"? Miluo official: It is indeed signed by the villagers[fig]]()