1. The defendant pleaded not guilty, how does the defender defend?
1 is whether the evidence presented by the defendant is valid enough to draw a conclusion of innocence; Especially whether the evidence is enough to overthrow or deny the plaintiff's evidence.
2. The authenticity and credibility of the defendant's evidence source will be the key.
3. Article 48 of China's Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that "if only the defendant confesses and there is no other evidence, the defendant cannot be found guilty and will not be punished". On the contrary, if there is other evidence that conforms to the law, you can be convicted and sentenced. Therefore, when you plead not guilty, you should not only rely on the confessions of lovers, but also consider whether the evidence chain of the case is complete and sufficient. If the existing evidence cannot be found guilty, the plea of innocence can be considered; If the existing evidence is sufficient, consider pleading guilty.
4. When the defendant does not plead guilty, the defender should not plead not guilty, but only plead not guilty;
5. If the defender thinks that the reason why the defendant thinks he is innocent is not valid, or after reading the paper, the defender thinks that the evidence of the public prosecution agency is very conclusive and the evidence of guilt is conclusive, and the defendant has not truthfully stated the facts of the case to the defender, he may refuse to defend according to law. Defender can't plead guilty if defendant doesn't plead guilty.
Legally speaking, the defender cannot accuse the defendant.
7. According to the theory of criminal procedure law, China's criminal procedure has changed from inquisitorial litigation to adversarial litigation, and the public prosecution agency has prosecuted the defendant on behalf of the state, accused him of committing a crime and produced evidence of guilt; Defenders put forward defense opinions on the allegations of public prosecution agencies, cross-examine evidence, and put forward materials and opinions on the defendant's innocence and light crime; The court decides in the middle, confirms the validity of the evidence, confirms whether it is guilty or not, and measures the severity of the crime. As a defender, you can't accuse the defendant of a crime in criminal defense.
Second, is there an inevitable conflict between the defender's innocent defense and the defendant's guilty plea?
1, I think it's ok.
2. This is determined by the professional attribute of the defender. According to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law, defenders have the responsibility to put forward materials and opinions to prove the innocence, lighten or reduce or exempt criminal responsibility of criminal suspects and defendants according to facts and laws, and safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of criminal suspects and defendants. Two points can be inferred from this: first, the defender's position is independent, and the defense is based on facts and laws, not on the defendant's subjective attitude, without the defendant's consent;
The responsibility of the defender is to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the defendant. Therefore, if the defendant is found innocent during the trial, or the evidence cannot prove that the defendant is guilty, the defender should put forward an innocent defense opinion out of defense responsibility (also professional ethics). Secondly, this is the need to pursue the ultimate judicial justice. Due to cognitive errors, misunderstanding or external pressure, it is entirely possible that in practice, although the defendant pleaded guilty, it did not actually constitute a crime, or did not commit the alleged criminal act at all. At this time, the defender's innocent defense is undoubtedly of great benefit to judicial justice.
To sum up, how does the defender defend when the defendant does not plead guilty? First of all, lawyers need to plead not guilty, and defenders can't accuse the defendant. During the trial, the lawyer shall submit materials that can prove the defendant's innocence or tend to be given a lighter punishment. And actively defend the defendant, such cases are a great test for a lawyer's professionalism, critical thinking ability and rational consciousness.