First, what is the premise of the crime of perverting the law?
It must be a wrong case! Only when there are misjudged cases can the crime of perverting the law be involved.
Criminal misjudged cases generally show four situations: guilty and innocent, innocent and guilty, felony and misdemeanor. The case of perverting the law in Song Jie may involve a "light sentence for a felony"
Second, how to distinguish between perverting the law and judge's discretion?
Judges are people, not machines! Although the Supreme People's Court has repeatedly emphasized the same sentence for similar cases and unified judgment standards, different judges will inevitably make different judgments, especially in the "sentencing" link of criminal cases. For example, the amount of fraud is extremely huge. 1 1 year, 12 years, 13 years is correct. Therefore, just because there are different opinions on sentencing, it cannot be considered as bending the law.
In Song Jie's case, Song Jie gave a one-year sentencing opinion, and after communicating with the President, the sentence was determined to be eight months. The final retrial result is two years and four months. The above three opinions are within the scope of sentencing. Therefore, just because three judges have three opinions, one of them cannot be considered as a crime of perverting the law.
Third, what is the relationship between bribery and bending the law?
After accepting bribes, it is possible to pervert the law and judge, or it is possible to still handle cases impartially; Misjudging the law may be due to receiving money, feelings or intervention. Therefore, in fact, there is no necessary direct connection between accepting bribes and bending the law. You can't talk nonsense and bend the law just because you accept bribes.
Especially in the case of Song Jie, Song Jie accepted bribes afterwards. Song Jie didn't know in advance that he would get the money because of the "light sentence". Therefore, in the case of Song Jie, it cannot be concluded that Song Jie perverted the law because of taking bribes. Whether Song Jie took bribes and whether Song Jie perverted the law should be evaluated independently. It is inappropriate to confuse the two.
Fourth, the presiding judge commanded the case and only reduced the sentence by two months. There is nothing wrong with the presiding judge following the guidance.
Justice is knowledge about experience. For the guidance of the old judge, there is nothing wrong with the young judge following his advice; Moreover, the old judge did not fundamentally change the case determination, but only guided the commutation for two months. How can a young judge refuse? Ask yourself, if I were in that position, I would choose to listen and obey. ...
Fifth, since I chose to be a judge, many dinners have to be rejected.
An important fact that Song Jie was accused of perverting the law was that he attended a dinner composed of three people from the public security organs. In my opinion, this dinner is the most important factual basis for determining that Song Jie constitutes the crime of perverting the law. Without this dinner, accusing Song Jie of abusing the law is a rootless tree and passive water. But even after attending this dinner, does Song Jie necessarily constitute the crime of perverting the law? Not necessarily. At this dinner, the president, not Song Jie, represented the court. Even after attending a dinner party, it was concluded that the sentence should be one year. ...
Sixth, not all law students are suitable to be judges! If you have no faith and persistence in the rule of law, you'd better not be a judge! This is my feeling after reading the verdict.
Rub a hot spot and write casually, and get some insights. ...
Beijing Tongzhou 202 1.5.7