Through this kind of communication, lawyers can ask the reasons and real thoughts of the defendant's sudden confession, especially the possible negative consequences of sudden confession in court, especially the confession in court will have a very negative impact on the lawyer's innocence defense. The defendant who suddenly retracted his confession in court is actually a party in trouble and needs legal guidance and advice from a lawyer urgently.
Whether the lawyer will continue to plead not guilty or change the way of defense depends on the result of negotiation and communication between the lawyer and the defendant. If the defendant repents after the good faith persuasion and advice of the lawyer, and agrees with the lawyer's concept of innocent defense, then the lawyer can certainly continue to defend innocence. If the defendant continues to plead guilty in court after consulting with the lawyer and resolutely opposes the innocent defense, then it is necessary for the lawyer to consider whether to continue to adhere to the position of innocent defense. The defendant is under construction
At the same time of pleading guilty, it is clearly opposed to the lawyer's continued innocence defense. Lawyers really need to consider whether to change their defense ideas according to the defendant's opinions or withdraw from the defense activities of the case. Of course, there are also cases where the defendant insists on pleading guilty and does not object to the lawyer's continued innocence defense. In this case, it is understandable that lawyers continue to plead not guilty after fulfilling the obligation of reminding and persuading.
From this point of view, in the face of the defendant's sudden retraction in court, the lawyer's crisis handling method shows the lawyer's legal wisdom. Lawyers don't have to change their defense ideas or directly withdraw from the case defense activities, let alone plead not guilty. The key here is that lawyers should realize that clients are in a weak position and need legal guidance and help from lawyers. Lawyers should restrain their desire to make "independent defense", try to communicate and negotiate with the defendant even for a short time, and then choose a defense idea that is accepted (at least not opposed) by the defendant.
legal ground
Article 193 of the Criminal Procedure Law 1
During the court hearing, the facts and evidence related to conviction and sentencing shall be investigated and debated. It is clear here that the relevant facts and evidence of conviction and sentencing should be debated.
Article 227th, paragraph 2, Interpretation of Criminal Procedure Law
In a case where the defendant does not plead guilty or the defender does not plead guilty, the court investigation shall find out the relevant sentencing facts on the basis of finding out the conviction facts. It is more clear here that in cases where the defendant does not plead guilty or the defender does not plead guilty, the court must find out the sentencing facts on the basis of finding out the conviction facts. Understand this content from the perspective of defense lawyers: that is to say, defense lawyers can express their innocent cross-examination opinions to the court during cross-examination and can also express their cross-examination opinions on sentencing.