Legalanalysis Of "Li Zhuang Fabricating Evidence And Obstructing Testifying Case"

In recent years, fabrication of evidence violated law, the crime of obstruction of evidence have occurred. Occurred in 2009 in Chongqing, Li Zhuang case of such cases is undoubtedly one of the most talked about cases. Court counsel fabricating evidence, obstruction of evidence Zhuang sentenced to imprisonment for 1 year and 6 months. Proceedings, the prosecution and the defense on trial three Zhuang constitute a crime, whether the composition of this crime saw a fierce debate.This will be the case for investigation, prosecution, trial, according to the current criminal law and reasonable comprehensive analysis of cases dealing with reasonable results. Case raises four issues. First, the objective aspect of this crime. In the objective aspect of crime is mainly manifested in two aspects that crime, the public prosecutor to tell the way that Li Zhuang Qi Qi Cheng lure the way the case of perjury. According to an objective analysis of the behavior of obstruction of evidence here refers to the lure of material benefits to the temptation of asking nor induced the lure of this crime. The object of this crime refers to acts of criminal evidence, including physical and material evidence, including not only includes the prosecution witnesses provided by witnesses. Second, the act committed and the result of guilty dispute. The crime is optional charges that defendants forged evidence, the crime of obstruction of evidence constituted by the two sub-actions, behavior and nuisance false witness evidence behavior. To arrive at a result of committing this crime is to be committed to the criteria for the classification results, for sure. Then according to the results of analysis of this crime of crimes, to determine whether the result of committing this crime conclusions. According to the analysis of this crime has come to commit acts committed with the results of the dual legal characteristics. So the courts and the prosecution and defense point of view is not accurate. Third, the false evidence. The court found the prosecution just die Gong materials and lawyers and his brother Gonggang Hua Ma Xiaojun's testimony to prove that a forged into evidence. But under the existing criminal law analysis of the evidence, the existence of torture is questionable, the fact-based and not fully investigated, according to law should not be determined. According to the evidence the court finds the analysis, Li Zhuang of torture based on reasonable suspicion, so the lack of direct criminal intent of this crime. Fourth, the prejudice to testify behavior. Prosecutor offers evidence to prove two. First, the mold was fabricated Gong just the fact of extortion and perjury to lure Qi Cheng. Second, aiding and abetting false Poly's staff work. From the existing facts as found by the Court of analysis, Li Zhuang employees in perjury abetting the crime of obstruction of evidence is established.Through the above analysis constitutes a defender Li Zhuang of the crime of obstruction of evidence, rather than the court of counsel fabricating evidence, and obstruction of the crime to testify. Li Zhuang sentenced to the penalty emphasis, reflecting the circumstances of the case from the material point of view, the behavior of Li Zhuang case constitutes the crime of obstruction of the suspension of the state to testify. According to the principle of suspension of the punishment should be made to reduce or waive the defendant's sentence. In the current environment and Li Zhuang criminal defense criminal acts and the extent of the social effects of this case point of view, the behavior of Li Zhuang exempted from punishment, in order to achieve the legal effects and social effects of unification.