An Analysis of the Plot of House

It's an analysis, not a plot, right? I think there are many "legal flaws" in the arrangement of the protagonist Su Chun's alleged crime of revealing trade secrets (involving 24 million yuan), so as to attract more attention. In the first question of evidence, when Pinghai answered Su Chun's question of suspected crime at the police station, the police officer first said: Further, if Pinghai tells the whereabouts of 60,000 yuan, it can be considered as surrender and a light sentence; After seeing Pinghai's indifference, he lured Pinghai to say, You can keep silent, but your attitude has an influence on Su Chun's judgment. Until noon, two policemen deliberately agreed at the door that you can go back and we will go to dinner, but if you don't answer, it may not be considered surrender, and so on. Under the temptation of two policemen, Pinghai finally told the whereabouts of 60,000 yuan. The two policemen then said with a smile that the real purpose of asking Pinghai was to find out the whereabouts and whereabouts of this 60,000 yuan. Article 15 of the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which China signed and acceded to, stipulates that each State party shall ensure that any confession determined to have been obtained by torture shall not be used as evidence in any proceedings, but such confession may be used as evidence that the alleged torturer extorted a confession by torture. According to Article 43 of the Criminal Procedure Law and Article 247 of the Criminal Law, the legislation has explicitly prohibited extorting confessions by torture, inducing confessions and other illegal means to obtain evidence, which is the embodiment of implementing the spirit of the Constitution and safeguarding citizens' basic rights. Article 51 of the Procedures for Handling Criminal Cases by Public Security Organs stipulates that extorting confessions by torture and collecting evidence by threats, enticements, deception or other illegal means are strictly prohibited. As can be seen from the above provisions, China has actually established the exclusion rule of illegally collected verbal evidence, so the evidence obtained in this way is of course invalid and illegal. In addition, in order to ensure that witnesses provide evidence truthfully, China's criminal procedure law has strict regulations on the procedures and methods of questioning witnesses. The collection of witness testimony must be carried out in accordance with legal procedures, and all citizens who are related to or understand the case must be guaranteed to provide evidence objectively and fully to ensure the authenticity of witness testimony. Article 98 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that when questioning a witness, he should first be informed that he should provide evidence and testimony truthfully, and that he should bear the legal responsibility for deliberately perjury or concealing criminal evidence. In order to get the testimony they want, the two policemen in the play did not act by seduction in accordance with the procedures and principles stipulated in the Criminal Procedure Law, which is obviously illegal. In the second story of detention, Su Chun went to work early on the first day and didn't come back until evening. Pinghai was so anxious that she didn't see Su Chun the next day, so she found the unit in Su Chun and heard that Su Chun had been detained by the police station on suspicion of committing a crime. There are many problems in this: according to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law, after detention, the organ that decided to detain should inform the family members or their units of the detained person of the reasons and places of detention within 24 hours, except in cases that hinder the investigation or cannot be notified. The so-called situation of obstructing investigation means that the suspect in the same case may escape, conceal, destroy or forge evidence; It is possible to collude with each other and form an offensive and defensive alliance; Or other accomplices remain to be verified. The so-called situation that cannot be informed refers to: the detainee does not speak his real name and address, and his identity is unknown; The detainees have no family members or work units. After the reasons that affect the notification disappear, the case-handling personnel shall immediately notify the family members of the detained person or their units. According to the plot, it has been more than 24 hours for Su Chun, and there is no "obstruction of investigation" in Su Chun's case, so the police did nothing, and Su Chun's family Pinghai took the initiative to find out about the detention. This obviously violates the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law. On the third charge, Su Chun was criminally detained by the public security organs on suspicion of leaking business secrets. The charges of criminal law are determined by the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate through judicial interpretation. According to the judicial interpretation of the "two highs" and the two supplementary provisions jointly issued by the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate on March 15, 2002 and August 15, 2003, there is no so-called "suspected crime of revealing business secrets". According to the facts of the case, it can only be the crime of infringing trade secrets (Article 2 19 of the Criminal Law), which refers to the act of obtaining the trade secrets of the obligee by improper means such as theft, inducement or coercion, or illegally disclosing, using or allowing others to use the trade secrets they have mastered or obtained, thus causing great losses to the obligee of trade secrets. The director of the play wrote and performed this crime, which is puzzling. In the play, lawyer Shen said when studying the case, "He said that all the works belong to him, but this involves a professional work, where he works, and he has no ownership of the works." According to Article 16 of the Copyright Law, works created by citizens to complete the tasks of legal persons or other organizations belong to job works. Copyright is generally owned by the author, but legal persons or other organizations have the right to give priority to the use within their business scope. Within two years after the completion of the work, the author shall not permit a third person to use the work in the same way as the work used by the unit without the consent of the unit. In other cases, the author enjoys the right of authorship, and other rights of copyright are enjoyed by legal persons or other organizations, which may reward the author. Therefore, it is one-sided to say that Su Chun has no ownership. In the play, lawyer Yang said to him, "I saw him today, and the situation is not very good. He was caught by the Security Section on the spot when dealing with the other party ... If you cooperate, they (public security organs) may think that there is a surrender plot and the sentence will be lighter. " When Pinghai answered questions at the police station, the police officer even told Pinghai that if he told her the whereabouts of 60,000 yuan, he could be considered to have surrendered himself and received a light sentence. However, according to Article 67 of the Criminal Law, those who voluntarily surrender after committing a crime and truthfully confess their crimes belong to surrender. It can be seen that when he surrendered himself, the criminal suspect confessed his crime to the judicial organs, which had nothing to do with the confessions and excuses of others. Therefore, whether Su Chun can be regarded as surrender has nothing to do with Pinghai's statement, and it is totally nonsense to say that it constitutes surrender. Question 6: After Su Chun was detained by the public security organs, Pinghai found the police station and the police officer told him that he could hire a defense lawyer. Former lawyer Yang and post lawyer Shen both claim to be defense lawyers, which is inappropriate. According to Article 33 of the Criminal Procedure Law, "a criminal suspect has the right to entrust a defender from the date when a public prosecution case is transferred for examination and prosecution". Article 96 stipulates: "A criminal suspect may hire a lawyer to provide him with legal advice and represent him in complaints and accusations after the first interrogation by the investigation organ or from the date when compulsory measures are taken. It can be seen that in the investigation stage, the legal status of lawyers is not defenders, but can only be called defenders in the examination and prosecution stage. In the story summary of the seventh withdrawal question, lawyer Shen said to him, "If it's iron, then you can use your relationship to get their unit to withdraw the lawsuit. Song Siming said: "This is not a private prosecution case." . I asked their unit to drop the lawsuit. What should the police do? "Hu Keqiang, head of Su Chun shipyard, dropped the lawsuit because of Song Siming's influence, and Su Chun was finally released. According to article 170 of China's Criminal Procedure Law and the relevant judicial interpretations on the scope of private prosecution cases, the crime of infringing business secrets belongs to public prosecution cases, not private prosecution cases. The biggest difference between a private prosecution case and a public prosecution case is that the state gives the victim the power to prosecute crimes, and the public prosecution case must be exercised by the people's procuratorate on behalf of the state public prosecution organ. Then it is obviously wrong for the victim to withdraw the criminal case in the play: What qualifications does Su Chun Company have to request the withdrawal of the public prosecution case? What right does the public security organ have to withdraw the case? The eighth question summoned lawyer Yang Dui and said, "I saw him today, and the situation is not very good. He was caught red-handed by the security section when dealing with the other party ... After Pinghai found the police officer at the police station, he was told: Don't go either, the mobile phone is on, and we will "summon" you at any time to ask some questions. According to the provisions of China's criminal procedure law, the police can only "summon" Ping Hai as a witness, not the so-called "summons". Summoning means that people's courts, people's procuratorates and public security organs use summonses to inform criminal suspects and defendants to appear in court for interrogation. Summon is not a compulsory measure, it is not mandatory, and no restraint device can be used. Summons are applicable to parties other than criminal suspects and defendants. The "summons" here is just a term created by the screenwriter. Lawyer Shen is really omnipotent in the ninth commission play. Without any authorization, he can not only understand the case, meet with Su Chun, but also consult the case file! And assign your assistant to "adjust the papers" for lawyer Yang! According to common sense, lawyers can only represent cases under the authorization of the parties and their close relatives, but the practice of lawyer Shen in the play is difficult for ordinary people to understand. In addition, according to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law and the Lawyers Law, the files of public security organs are state secrets at the stage of filing a case for investigation, and lawyers are not allowed to consult them at all. Only when the case enters the stage of examination, prosecution or trial, the lawyer has the right to consult, extract and copy the litigation documents and case files related to the case. The story in the play violates the law, which is also seriously inconsistent with the lawyer's practice. To sum up, there are too many legal flaws in such a popular TV series. From the perspective of popularizing the law, it is indeed a simple, vivid, direct and effective method to publicize and interpret the law by using film and television dramas. Because film and television works are intuitive and entertaining, it is feasible to obtain the most basic legal knowledge education through the dissemination of film and television works. We don't need to read a lot of legal provisions and legal works, but we can understand the legal culture and important judicial system of the country by enjoying some legal-related film and television works. Law is a secular cause, the first thing is to solve problems, but it is also a search and understanding of the meaning of life. Therefore, the law has a very human side, which contains the intuitive pursuit of justice and fairness, and the relevant legal literature works will imply the unsystematic thinking of the law in some times or figures, and the specific information of the legal system in some times, which can be analyzed by us. In a sense, our film and television works may also have the functions of spreading legal knowledge, carrying forward legal spirit and cultivating legal consciousness. It is suggested that our film and television creators should not adopt a casual and rough attitude to avoid possible misleading and negative effects. In fact, it is not too difficult to do this. First of all, the director should learn at least some legal knowledge related to the plot. Secondly, strengthen the internal and external review of films. There should be legal advisers inside, and lawyers should be forced to be hired as legal advisers among the members of the TV drama group; Externally, review the legal issues of supervision, distribution and other departments, and the TV drama review expert group absorbs lawyers. Doing these links well is the practice and promotion of the legal spirit.