In the past few days, some netizens have been wondering what my identity is, whether I am collecting money and laundering. Some netizens take the things that are spread online and have no factual basis for the time being, so that I can explain everything and not pick the east and the west; the other part of the netizens are holding the interview content in Wang Zhian's "Situation" column to question. Therefore, before getting into the main topic, let's first talk about what is called "doubt".
"Suspicious" is defined in the dictionary as "suspicious". I don't know how the majority of netizens understand this "place", my own understanding is anyway "a thing that has actually happened and has a tangible factual basis", in law, there is a special term for this called basic facts. That kind of thing really happened, but it was unreasonable, so I felt that there was a problem, which is called "doubt", which is also called a presumption of fact in law.
For example, netizens said, you explained " why Lin sent Mo's son abroad, if there is such a good thing for the murderer's son, he must have a problem." Among them, "Lin sent Mo's son abroad" as the basic fact, "normal people can't be so good to the murderer, he must have a problem" is a presumptive fact. So should we first confirm that "Lin sent Mo's son abroad" this thing really happened, because only when it happens, the subsequent presumption will be established. Moreover, in law, only the claimant needs to be able to prove the existence of the underlying facts, and there is no need for further evidence to prove the existence of the presumed facts. Refuting the presumption of facts is a matter for the opposing party. So, should netizens go first and only need to determine the basic facts?
And now what are netizens doing? "I just suspect that Lin has a problem, otherwise why would he send Mo's son abroad?" But it has been so long that there is no basis for confirming this matter at all, and the original sources that released these messages have not provided any more evidence. You can't even prove the basic facts, but you are skeptical about it, isn't that nonsense?
A thing that has no basic facts, I call it air is not exaggerated, netizens are talking about this kind of air, spreading it wildly, as if they got a baby, I am indeed a little speechless.
Now, let's get down to the point and talk about The Situation and the Verdict.
"The Situation" was a character interview program hosted by Wang Zhi'an that year, and his interview subjects for the "Hangzhou Nanny Arson Case" included Lin Shengbin, Uncle Zhu, Greentown Property and Security, and Party lawyers. Among them, except for the part of the party lawyer, it premiered on July 15, 2017 (the interview time should be around July 8). As for the part of the party lawyer, sorry I did not find the exact time, but only according to the several time points mentioned by the party lawyer in the video and Wang Zhian's YouTube text, he should have been interviewed after the prosecution (August 21), and the program was broadcast after the trial (December 21).
Wang Zhian was also mentioned again because of the recent Lin Shengbin incident, and many netizens praised his questions as sharp and to the point. I don't know if you don't know anything about it, so I suggest you first understand why an investigative journalist who looks so "good" is banned from the whole network, and also go to see what he tweeted after he ran to Japan. Then, go back and think about whether the so-called sharp and sharp questions of his news investigations at that time are really news literacy or have a certain purpose.
Let me give you a few examples of discrepancies between the contents of The Situation and the actual verdict.
Uncle Zhu asked the fire at about 6:47 and 48 minutes, "Have you seen anyone inside", and the fire department replied "They said they didn't see anyone"
Transcript of Uncle Zhu's interview
The record in the verdict is that Uncle Zhu asked the firefighters at the scene if there was anyone at home, and the soldiers said that they had not seen anyone and that the bedroom had not been searched.
Uncle Zhu testified in court
The important half sentence "The bedroom has not been searched" after this is not said by Uncle Zhu in the interview, or did Wang Zhi'an not cut it?
The party lawyer said in the interview that "you ask for supplementary investigation of the fire brigade, you at least your firefighting on-site commanders, firefighters, your own operators, the first batch of these people who arrived at the scene, you have to collect your testimony", and also preached that "I applied to the court for the firefighters reflected in the case file and asked them to testify in court, such as the commanders, the first personnel of the Omi Squadron who arrived at the scene." But the court has not yet replied.".
In the verdict, this information about the fire department is basically recorded.
Dang lawyer said in the interview: "Mo Huanjing said that she had reported to the police, and I think this is a favorable evidence for her, but there is no case file."
Mo Huanjing's police record was mentioned many times in the verdict, and later legal aid lawyers also defended it on this basis.
In an interview, a lawyer for the party said that "the procuratorate's review and prosecution time is far lower than the statutory time, and the statutory time is one month."
According to Article 169 of China's Criminal Procedure Law at that time, the people's procuratorate shall make a decision within 1 month for cases transferred for prosecution by the investigation organs, and major and complex cases may be extended by half a month. (Since the Criminal Procedure Law in force is the latest amendment in 2018, it is quoted from the 2012 amendment that was in effect in 2017.) ）
Therefore, one month is the legal maximum time, and Wang Zhian did not add any annotations to the possible misleading statement of the party lawyer when editing the video later.
I'm not going to completely deny the interviews with the parties in "The Situation", nor do I want to question the interviewees' lies, I just want to remind you:
At least looking back now, the column was completely controlled by a skeptic at the time.
Even if the first point is omitted, we must also pay attention to the time when these subjects were interviewed and the time when the case was finally tried and pronounced, which is a big difference.
In any case, "The Situation" is only a character interview program, and the interviewees have a certain exaggeration or exaggeration of some descriptions because of emotional factors, which I think is very normal and understandable; while the court testimony is different, the testimony requires accuracy and truthfulness.
Therefore, in terms of timeliness, accuracy and legal effect, I personally feel that the judgment should be more convincing than the "Situation", and when there is a discrepancy between the two contents, I will be more inclined to believe the judgment.
Since I have written so much, I will say a few more words, who is the person who made the 120 call, and what does Wang Zhian mean in the interview with the party lawyer.
First of all, the original words of the party lawyer were "I see that he is too young", and I don't know how netizens understand him as "minor", and even said that it must be Mo's son.
In addition, this phone call was indeed made by the property, and the party lawyer also said it himself in the interview, and somehow netizens are still guessing his identity. And on February 1, 2018, the day the first instance trial resumed, the official also announced the text version of the content of the call. (News headline "Hangzhou Nanny Arson Case Reopened: Recording of Six Police Calls and Callback Calls Made Public", netizens can search and verify on their own)
120 call logs
But in fact, at this time, 120 had already sent an ambulance and arrived at the scene, and the party lawyer also mentioned that "120 should not have reported this situation with 119", and the on-site fire protection work was carried out according to the situation that some people were trapped. It can be considered that whether there is this call or not, there is no decisive influence on the final outcome of the event. Are you going to say he misreported? It is a misreporting, it is a property dereliction of duty, so in the end, it is not the end of the Reconciliation between the Lin Family Zhu Family and Greentown, and the compensation of Greentown. So, there's nothing to tangle, not so many conspiracy theories, little stories.
What about the secret that Wang Zhi'an said in an interview with a party lawyer? In fact, if you have read the interview of the party lawyer in its entirety, the point he wants to target is really very, very clear in the interview, and it is almost impossible to directly report the name of the unit. If you combine the party lawyer's withdrawal statement that year and his identity and duties as the defendant's defense lawyer, you should be able to guess. His point was not Lin at all, and it could even be said that the party lawyers, the Lin family, and the Zhu family had the same goal at that time, but the purpose was different. Uncle Zhu personally said in "The Situation" what their families believed was the absolute cause of the final death of Xiao Zhen's four people. But, to be honest, I personally don't agree with them, and so do I. I will not go into details, I will post a briefing on the situation of that year, and the rest of you will think for yourself.
Briefing of the Hangzhou Intermediate Court
I have to say that Wang Zhi'an is a bit bad. At the beginning of this month, when the hot spot of this event first rose, he sent a tweet with a very clear meaning, and he wanted to incite everyone to take this point, but it seems that no one picked up his move, and everyone was vying to be "Network Sherlock Holmes". Later, even he himself was speechless about "Network Sherlock Holmes", bluntly saying that "there is no doubt in the Hangzhou arson case at the criminal level." Instead of being an amateur Holmes on Weibo, it is better to look at the interviews of party lawyers, the real secret is here." This time it worked, and the "Network Holmes" turned their attention to the party lawyers, but they were still analyzing the criminal content, which was bizarre and outrageous. I really wonder, Wang Zhian's sentence is not long, how can you only look at the last third and completely ignore the first two-thirds. It is estimated that Wang Zhian may also be thinking now, you are the worst netizens I have "brought" to.
Wang Zhi'an Weibo
Finally, to borrow a phrase from Tesla's legal department, I would like to end, "Think independently and distinguish between right and wrong."