The Complaint for Fraud is a complaint that I submit for everyone. You are welcome to refer to it. I hope that how to write a good complaint will be helpful to everyone!
Applicant: Yang Moumou, the wife of Yan Moumou, the defendant in the original trial, female, Han nationality, born on June 3, 1968, from ** County, Henan Province.
The complainant hereby appeals to the Criminal Judgment No. 143 of the People's Court of a certain city and a certain district (2010).
Request:
In Yan Moumou’s contract fraud case, the facts found in the original judgment were unclear and the application of the law was seriously wrong. We request the People’s Court to retrial and acquit the defendant in accordance with the law.
Facts and reasons:
The complainant believes that the criminal judgment No. There were serious errors in the facts of the case and in the application of the law. What is particularly important is that after the original judgment was rendered, the defendant was brutally deprived of his legal right to appeal, a fact that the complainant only learned about by meeting with the defendant after the judgment came into effect.
First, while the defendant was being held in the No. 1 Detention Center of a certain city, the relevant personnel used illegal means to force the defendant to lose his free will and be unable to appeal, thereby brutally depriving the defendant of his right to appeal and depriving him of the right to defend his rights. opportunity to own legal rights.
According to the provisions of Article 129 of the "Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China", if the defendant refuses to accept the first-instance judgment or ruling of the local people's court at any level, he has the right to appeal to the people's court at the next higher level. Appeal by pleading or orally. The defendant shall not be deprived of his right to appeal under any pretext. The law gives the defendant the right to appeal. However, in this case, the defendant's right to appeal was brutally deprived, which seriously violated the defendant's right to criminal procedure.
After the verdict was announced in this case, the plaintiff and other relatives of the defendant were dissatisfied with the verdict and insisted on appealing. However, during the appeal process, the case handler told the plaintiff that if he did not accept the verdict, he could appeal directly to the detention center. Another strange thing is that after receiving the verdict, the defendant stated that he would not appeal, and said that he would be released from prison as soon as possible. It would be more comfortable after being released from prison, and the sentence would not be long. He would strive to perform better in prison and try to get a reduced sentence as much as possible. , the complainant was unable to see the defendant due to restrictions in legal practice and could not understand the defendant's situation. In addition, due to the persuasion of the case handler, the complainant believed it to be true.
However, when the complainant visited the defendant in prison after the original judgment came into effect and asked the defendant why he did not appeal, the defendant told the complainant that after receiving the original judgment, he had clearly expressed his dissatisfaction. He requested an appeal, but the relevant officers used illegal means to torture him physically and mentally, depriving him of food, water, and sleep, which forced the defendant to give up the idea of ??appealing. The defendant gave up the idea of ????appealing, which led to the defendant even wanting to die. Because he could not bear it, he did not insist on the appeal against his will.
To sum up, the investigators ignored the law and made wrongful decisions, deprived the defendant of his right to appeal, and deprived the defendant of the opportunity for legal relief. This has seriously violated the "Criminal Procedure Law" and "Criminal Law" , is a blatant and outright illegal and criminal act; moreover, this illegal act conceals the serious errors in the original judgment from another aspect, and the original judgment contains serious errors. If the original verdict complies with the law, why take such a big risk to prevent the defendant from appealing?
Secondly, when the facts of the accusation were unclear, the original trial verdict that the defendant was guilty of contract fraud was inconsistent with the facts and lacked evidence. The dispute between the defendant and the victim was a civil contract dispute, not a criminal offense. Confusing the "crime of contract fraud" with general civil contract disputes is an unclear fact and an error in characterization.