What's wrong with this lawyer?!-Chapter 936 - 302 PUA Old Wang_2

Chapter 936 -302 PUA Old Wang_2

Chen Jing helplessly said, “Director Zheng, you’re expecting an apology letter, but they didn’t mention any of this at all. They’ve clearly stated that only they can decide when this game ends. Their intention is very clear.”

Zheng Limin’s eyebrows formed a character ‘川’: “This surname Tang… does he have a problem, okay, he truly has issues, but doesn’t he fear anything at all?”

“Doesn’t he know about our company’s situation in Jingzhou? Is he really willing to become an enemy with our company for a commoner? Has schizophrenia made his brain split too?”

Zheng Limin really wanted to rant but didn’t know where to begin.

Chen Jing shook her head and said with a bitter smile, “Director Zheng, if it were anyone else, it would be one thing, but Tang Fangjing is truly fearless. The incident in Lincheng and the case in the neighboring Tianyan City, if he were afraid, he wouldn’t have done what he did.”

Old Tang is not afraid, and why is he not afraid? Because he’s fearless.

Anyway, that’s the attitude: if you have the ability, then kill me; on other levels, it’s basically impossible now, after all, after many near-death experiences, he has already built a strong barrier.

This is not something that can be ruined by some media or a few people.

So only physical elimination would work, but the very thing Old Tang fears the least is physical elimination.

Zheng Limin said with extreme irritation, “So we have no way to deal with this Tang Fangjing now? I refuse to believe that!”

But for now, it’s just talk; he doesn’t have any good solutions. Backgrounds, for the most part, are for show.

Chen Jing shook her head and said, “Director Zheng, let’s not rush. Tang Fangjing is just one man, and our case has such solid evidence that it’s impossible for him to overturn the verdict, not to mention what comes after.”

“Even if he could overturn it, we wouldn’t need to fear him; we haven’t done anything illegal. He can’t just pin a crime on us.”

It’s just that Chen Jing, after thinking it over for a while, felt like they were somewhat panic-stricken by the name Tang Fangjing, as if they were thrown into disarray when nothing had really happened yet.

The most uptodat𝓮 n𝒐vels are published on freёnovelkiss.com.

Zheng Limin nodded, and it indeed seemed to be the case. Then they would temporarily let it be, since there was no solution anyway.

Inside the Tengda Office, Old Tang put down his phone and then called out, “Qingqing, pack my things. I’m heading to the Procuratorate.”

Now that the case had been transferred, he could review the files, and he had many things to do.

Firstly, he needed to defend Lan Baosheng and assert his innocence, and secondly, over two hundred law consultancy firms in Jingzhou City were still waiting for his patronage.

Pan Youyun thought that Tang wouldn’t be so perverse, but Old Tang just wanted to prove that he’s the man you can never figure out.

Still alone, Old Tang walked into the Bright District Procuratorate with his bag in hand.

He was already familiar with the place, having made an appointment with the prosecutor handling the case beforehand, as was necessary.

Old Tang began reviewing the case files, meticulously flipping through the dossiers while the system pane had already recorded all the contents. Soon enough, he found some interesting points.

All of Lan Baosheng’s several discussions had been recorded, which matched his previous conjecture perfectly—the municipal landscaping company wanted to send Lan Baosheng behind bars.

Many people believe that private recordings can’t be admitted as evidence, basing this belief on the rule of excluding illegally obtained evidence.

This is also called the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine, which means that fruits from a toxic tree should not be consumed, regardless of whether the fruit is actually toxic.

Of course, this is a requirement in other countries, but in our country, the admissibility of private recordings as evidence is not a one-size-fits-all matter.

Honestly speaking, it would be easy to write a five-thousand-word essay on this. Whether evidence will be admitted in practice is not simply determined by whether the collection was done secretly or stealthily.

Many people’s knowledge on this matter comes from online searches or by understanding it through TV shows and films.

Two people sitting there having a conversation, one says, “Our talk just now has been recorded, you better prepare for jail,” and the other responds, “You recorded it secretly just now, so the evidence is invalid.”

In practice, it’s never that simple; cases have to be analyzed specifically.

So to understand it, don’t go reading various nonsense online; you should directly refer to legal regulations on the matter. Opinions can be subjective, but the law is the law!

Leaving civil cases aside, as they are more complex, let’s talk about criminal cases for now.

Audio and video recordings fall under audiovisual materials in criminal cases, and the “Judicial Interpretation of the Supreme Court on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law” article 109 has specific provisions regarding this.

Audiovisual materials cannot serve as a basis for judgment if they meet any of the following conditions:

(1) They are altered, forged, or cannot be verified as genuine;

(2) There are questions about the time, place, or method by which they were produced or obtained, and no reasonable explanation can be offered.

Similarly, “Public Security Authorities Handling Criminal Cases Procedures” article 71 also states that if physical evidence, documentary evidence, audiovisual materials, electronic data are collected in violation of legal procedures, and it might seriously affect judicial fairness, they should be corrected or a reasonable explanation must be provided; if they cannot be corrected or no reasonable explanation is given, the evidence should be excluded.

Neither of the two provisions state that “audiovisual materials will be invalid without the consent of the other party.”

On the contrary, they both say that evidence collected in violation of legal procedures can still be admitted if a reasonable explanation can be provided.

What exactly makes an explanation reasonable?… It all depends on the court’s determination, which is why the practice is so complicated.