The first instance procedure of the court is divided into five parts.
1 The hearing here is mainly for the presiding judge to investigate the natural situation of the defendant. The procuratorate will read out the indictment, and then simply ask the defendant the factual part of the indictment (this part is not very important, because what is asked will not become evidence without proof and cross-examination, mainly to investigate: when, where, what happened, and who is the party).
This part of the court investigation is quite important. This link is the link of proof and cross-examination, that is, first, the procuratorate lists the evidence of the alleged criminal facts, and the defendant and his defender cross-examine the evidence, and then the defendant's defender lists the evidence. The cross-examination of the procuratorate is the most important link, because the procuratorate accuses you of fraud. It will list the evidence that proves that the defendant has committed the acts listed in the objective elements of fraud in the criminal law. To put it simply, what the defendant did was consistent with the behavior in the crime of fraud, mainly to prove this point. First of all, explain the importance to you. In this link, the evidence chain of the procuratorate is generally in this order: at a certain time and place, the defendant actively or passively participated in something, causing those losses to XXX. The evidence listed is mainly to prove that the defendant is guilty of fraud, so secondly, I will explain to you what is called cross-examination, that is, to doubt the evidence cited by the procuratorate. To put it bluntly, that's it. The method of cross-examination is to say that the source of evidence in the procuratorate is illegal, the form of evidence is illegal, and the content of evidence does not conform to the facts. As long as you are right, then this evidence can't be evidence. Of course, evidence includes witness, material evidence and documentary evidence. You can cross-examine according to this method (but there is no way to say how to use these methods here, it will be too long. If you don't study law, you can't learn it in a short time. I suggest consulting a lawyer. The key is to make sure that the evidence of the procuratorate cannot be evidence, so the crime cannot be determined. After the procuratorate gives evidence, it's time for you to give evidence. Didn't you say you could meet the conditions of probation? Then, the first thing to say is that my client, that is, the defendant, did not commit fraud, and sought evidence from the objective elements of fraud to prove that there was no crime. But it should be noted that this link is the most important, and the evidence cited here is directly related to what crime is found and how many years it is sentenced)
The first step of the court debate is that the procuratorate reads out the prosecution opinion, and then the defender reads out the defense. In the defense, your defense opinion is based on the evidence just listed in the court investigation stage. It is useless to defend without evidence. The second point is that the court has not clarified the problem after cross-examining the evidence. The presiding judge will put forward the focus of the debate, and both the prosecution and the defense will debate and explain to the court. This link is for the presiding judge, not for the other party. Please pay attention to this. In this link, you should pay attention to the way the procuratorate must refute the focus of the debate put forward by the presiding judge. You should carefully study the composition of fraud. If you refute it from this aspect, you have a good chance of winning. The same view can only be said once in court debate, and it must be to the point. This link cannot be repeated.
The defendant finally said that this link is an opportunity for the defendant to defend himself, mainly based on the constitution of fraud, that is to say, his behavior does not meet the constitutive requirements of fraud, or his behavior meets the conditions of probation.
In the appraisal and trial stage, the collegial panel will conduct appraisal and then make a judgment. Generally, the verdict will not be pronounced in court, but will be pronounced on a date.
The procedure is mainly the five parts I mentioned above. I suggest you find a lawyer. If you have no money, you can apply for legal aid. If I want to suspend my sentence, I suggest saying in court that "my client has actively compensated the victim's losses, and if I suspend my sentence, it will be of great help to my client to compensate the victim's losses"-I personally participated in the crime of fraud. This sentence can be said in the defense, there are many problems, such as asking for withdrawal of the lawsuit, how to appeal and many other technical problems, so I strongly suggest that you find a lawyer, and you can ask me if you don't understand.