This is an incident that has aroused national attention and controversy, and also exposed many issues such as online public opinion, media ethics, law and justice. A CCTV intern four years ago accused Zhu Jun, a famous CCTV host, of sexually harassing him online, which triggered heated discussions and sympathy from all walks of life. Zhu Jun, on the other hand, insisted on his innocence and took Xianzi to court to protect his reputation and rights. After more than three years of litigation, the court finally dismissed Xianzi's claim on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence, and Zhu Jun was justified. Xianzi, on the other hand, was exposed to be manipulated by behind the scenes, intending to slander Zhu Jun and seek improper benefits. Can such a result give Zhu Jun justice and a future? Can such an incident arouse our attention and reflection on issues such as online violence, public opinion supervision, and judicial justice?
On June 10, 2014, Xianzi entered the program group of CCTV's "Art of Life" as an intern. In the afternoon of the same day, when interviewing Zhu Jun in the dressing room, he was tried to molest by the other party through his clothes and forcibly kissed for several minutes. Afterwards, she and her teacher called the police, but the police did not file a case and asked her to consider Zhu Jun's "positive influence".
On August 15, 2018, Zhu Jun commissioned a law firm to issue a statement, saying that a large amount of information related to "Zhu Jun's sexual harassment of interns" appeared on the Internet as rumors, and filed a lawsuit with the Haidian District People's Court in Beijing, holding "Internet users and media who continued to publish and neglect to delete the above-mentioned false information." On the same day, the Beijing News interviewed "Mai Yao classmate": After Zhu Jun spoke, the whistleblower and the parties wanted to go to court. On October 25, 2018, Xianzi's case against Zhu Jun was accepted by the Haidian District People's Court in Beijing. On December 2, 2020, the case was heard at the Haidian District People's Court. On the same day, some supporters of Xianzi expressed their solidarity at the entrance of the courthouse, and some foreign media reporters who came to cover the news were taken away by the police.
On September 14, 2021, after a closed hearing, the Beijing Haidian Court found that the evidence submitted by Xianzi was insufficient to prove sexual harassment by Zhu Jun, and rejected his claim in the first instance. After the trial, Xianzi read a statement to supporters outside the courthouse, saying that the judge had not given him a chance to elaborate on the charges and had not allowed the prosecution to access multiple pieces of evidence, such as surveillance footage, group photos, transcript documents and DNA on the clothes he was wearing. In a statement, Xianzi said: "Thank you very much, I will definitely appeal."
On August 10, 2022, the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People's Court held a closed hearing to hear the case, and the verdict was upheld on the spot due to insufficient evidence. According to the judgment of the second instance, the evidence submitted by Xianzi mainly includes the following three categories:
· The first is the audio recording and photo of Xianzi when he called the police on June 11, 2014. The court held that the evidence could only prove that Xianzi had called the police, but could not prove that Zhu Jun sexually harassed him.
· The second is the Weibo article and video published by Xianzi on July 26, 2018. The court held that the evidence could only prove that Xianzi had made remarks accusing Zhu Jun of sexual harassment, but could not prove the authenticity of the remarks.
· The third is a transcript of Zhu Jun's interview with the police on June 11, 2014, obtained by Xianzi from internal court documents in January 2019. The court held that this transcript was not an official investigation material, but a record of the police when they initially understood the situation, and there were contradictions and inconsistencies between the content and Xianzi's allegations, so it could not be used as valid evidence to prove Zhu Jun's sexual harassment.
The court also pointed out that Xianzi failed to provide direct or indirect evidence such as surveillance video, group photos, and DNA on clothes during the interview with Zhu Jun in the dressing room, nor did it provide the testimony of colleagues, teachers, leaders, and others who worked with Zhu Jun that year. Therefore, the court held that the evidence submitted by Xianzi was insufficient to refute Zhu Jun's statement that he denied sexual harassment, nor was it sufficient to establish the fact that Zhu Jun sexually harassed him.
After the second-instance verdict, Xianzi published a long post on Weibo, saying that he was disappointed and helpless about the result, and said that he had done his best, but still could not get justice. She also revealed that during the lawsuit, she was subjected to various threats and intimidation, and some people even tried to buy her to withdraw the lawsuit, claiming that there were masterminds behind her to manipulate her to slander Zhu Jun.
Zhu Jun issued a brief statement on Weibo, saying that he had experienced more than four years of suffering and torture, thanked the court for giving him justice and innocence, and thanked his family, friends and fans for their support and trust. He also said that he would continue to pursue Xianzi's liability for infringement of his right to reputation and moral damage, and hoped that society would give him a quiet and warm environment.
This incident has aroused the attention and discussion of all sectors of society. Some questioned whether the court's decision was fair and reasonable, and whether it protected the interests and rights of the victims; Some people sympathized with Zhu Jun's experience and plight, and called on society to give him more understanding and respect.
First of all, from the perspective of online public opinion, this incident has exposed the harm and hidden dangers of online violence. After Xianzi published an article accusing Zhu Jun of sexual harassment on the Internet, it immediately aroused enthusiastic response and support from netizens, and many people personally attacked and abused Zhu Jun without verifying the facts, and some even conducted human flesh searches and harassment of him. Zhu Jun, on the other hand, became a public enemy of the Internet, was forced to withdraw from the public eye, and suffered huge reputational damage and mental pressure. This situation shows that while online public opinion plays a role in supervision and disclosure, it is also easy to be used and manipulated, causing harm and grievances to innocent people. Therefore, we should strengthen the regulation and management of online public opinion, improve the rationality and judgment of netizens, and prevent the occurrence and spread of online violence.
Secondly, from the perspective of media ethics, this incident has exposed the phenomenon and problem of media failure and irregularity. After Xianzi published an article accusing Zhu Jun of sexual harassment on the Internet, many media reported and reprinted it a lot without verifying the facts, and used this to attract attention and traffic. Zhu Jun, on the other hand, was one-sidedly smeared and slandered by the media, and did not receive fair and objective reporting and evaluation. This situation shows that while the media disseminate information and public opinion, it is also easy to lose its own professional ethics and social responsibility, resulting in bias and misleading public opinion. Therefore, we should strengthen the education and supervision of media ethics, improve the professional level and credibility of the media, and prevent the occurrence and spread of media failure and irregularity.
Third, from the perspective of legal justice, this incident reflects the difficulties and challenges of legal justice. The case of Xianzi against Zhu Jun went through more than three years of litigation, during which both sides encountered various difficulties and obstacles. Xianzi said that he was unfairly or unreasonably treated in the police, evidence collection, litigation and other links, and could not obtain sufficient legal aid and protection. Zhu Jun said that in the face of Xianzi's groundless accusations, he could not obtain enough evidence to prove his innocence and could not obtain enough compensation to make up for the losses he had suffered. This situation shows that the legal judiciary faces great difficulties and challenges in handling cases involving complex factors such as personal privacy, lack of evidence, and public opinion interference, such as sexual harassment, and it is difficult to meet the parties' needs for fair, timely and effective justice. Therefore, we should strengthen the reform and improvement of law and justice, improve the efficiency and quality of law and justice, and prevent errors and delays in law and justice.
In short, the incident of Zhu Jun's four-year self-proof innocence is a distressing and regrettable incident, and it is also an event that has triggered our deep thinking and reflection. We should start from online public opinion, media ethics, law and justice, strengthen norms and improvements, protect innocent people from online violence and slander, and provide more care and support to victims. At the same time, we should also respect Zhu Jun's choice and wishes, and give him a quiet and warm environment so that he can regain confidence and hope.