"Does your breeding company have a license to sell parrots?" The old inspector asked.

"Nope." Ning Jinfeng said.

"I'm done!" The old prosecutor looked at the judge.

"Does the defendant's advocate need to ask questions of the defendant?" The male judge asked.

"Questions." After Fang Yi finished speaking, he paused and said, "Ning Jinfeng, are the parrots you sell wild or bred?" ”

"All the parrots in my company are bred, there are no wild ones, and the parrots I sell are all bred in the company." Ning Jinfeng said very cooperatively.

"When you sell a parrot to a pet store, do you know what they are buying it for?" Fang Yi asked.

"I know, I specifically asked Boss Zhang at that time. He said it was sold to others as pets for ornamental use. Ning Jinfeng said.

"According to the indictment, in addition to not having a license to sell parrots, the Golden Phoenix Breeding Co., Ltd. operated by Ling has permission documents to raise, purchase and breed parrots, is that so?" Fang Yi asked.

"Yes, our company is fully licensed, but we don't have a license to sell, and it's up to me because I don't have a sense of law and don't know much about the sale of wild animals, which leads to crime. I implore the court to give me another chance, our company is applying for a license to sell parrots, and we will definitely operate in accordance with the law in the future. Ning Jinfeng said with tears in her eyes.

"The defender has finished asking!" Fang Yi said.

"Let's present evidence and cross-examine ......," the male judge said.

As for the evidence provided by the prosecutor, Fang Yi and Ning Jinfeng all agreed, and there was nothing to say about the evidence in this case.

"The facts of this case have been investigated, the court investigation has been completed, and the court arguments are now begining. Court debates revolve around disputed facts that have not been certified by the court and how the law should be applied based on the facts.

I will now turn to the Public Prosecutor. The male judge said

“…… Defendant Ning Jinfeng illegally sold six African gray parrots and other national key protected animals, and his conduct constituted the crime of illegally selling rare and endangered wild animals.

Ning Jinfeng's illegal sale of rare and endangered wildlife is serious, and he shall be sentenced to between 5 and 10 years imprisonment in accordance with law. In view of Ning Jinfeng's qualifications to artificially breed the parrots involved in the case, that the parrots involved in the case were animals that he legally purchased and then artificially bred, and that he truthfully confessed the crimes he committed after being brought into the case, pleaded guilty and repented, and considered all the factors of the case, we recommend that he be sentenced to five years imprisonment. Complete! The old inspector said.

"The defendant defends himself." The male judge said.

"Judge, please give me a chance, my company is applying for a license to sell parrots, and I plead guilty and accept punishment......" Ning Jinfeng said as he wiped his tears, and at the end he couldn't stop crying.

"The defendant's defender gives his defense opinion." The male judge said.

The defender believes that although the defendant Ning Jinfeng's illegal sale of parrots constitutes the crime of illegally selling rare and endangered wild animals, the harm to society is not great, and the parrots sold are artificially bred parrots, so the punishment should be reduced and punished below the statutory penalty. Here's why:

1. The Jinfeng Breeding Co., Ltd., founded by the defendant Ning Jinfeng, has the qualifications to artificially breed parrots.

The defendant held a license to breed parrots issued by the Provincial Forestry Department, and had the artificial breeding qualifications for breeding 12 species of wild animals under national first- and second-class protection, including golden-headed parrots, blue monk parrots, African gray parrots, sun cone-tailed parrots, and blue-gold corrugs. The parrots purchased and raised have also been approved by the forestry department.

It can be seen that the defendant's act of selling artificially bred parrots is fundamentally different in terms of harmful consequences compared with other acts of illegally selling pure wild animals under national key protection.

2. The parrots sold by Ning Jinfeng are artificially bred animals, not precious and endangered wild animals under national key protection, and the two are very different in nature.

The defender believes that for the crime of destroying artificially bred wildlife resources, the artificial breeding of the animals involved in the case is an important factor that should be considered in the conviction and sentencing of this case.

The Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Law in the Trial of Criminal Cases of Destruction of Wildlife Resources mentioned by the public prosecutor was a judicial interpretation implemented in 2000. At the time of the promulgation of the interpretation, domestic aquaculture technology was not yet mature, and it was understandable that wild animals under state protection were given the same protection as farmed animals, and that they were of equal value.

However, more than ten years have passed, and the domestic wildlife breeding technology has long been different from what it used to be, and it is also a national protected animal, but the value of wild animals and the value of farmed animals are different.

For example, the sika deer, which is listed as a national first-class protected wild animal, has a breeding scale of more than one million heads, and has become an important breeding industry in some provinces, and the artificially bred sika deer have been treated as domestic animals, which is obviously different from the value of wild sika deer.

This can be reflected in Article 7 of the "Methods for Assessing the Value of Wild Animals and Their Products" (issued in 2017, borrowed here in advance) issued by the State Forestry Administration, that is, the value of artificially bred wild animals and their products shall be implemented according to 50% of the value of the same wild animals and their products.

In this case, all the parrots sold by the defendant Ning Jinfeng were artificially bred parrots, and the gray parrot involved in the case was listed in Appendix I of the Convention and was a national first-class protected wild animal. However, the existing wild population is still large, and the scale of artificial breeding is also considerable, so it is suspected of mechanical justice to simply impose a sentence on the defendant based on the level of protection at the time of conviction and sentencing.

In addition, according to the report of the forestry department, the parrot species sold by the defendant belonged to species with mature artificial breeding technology and large breeding scale, which shows that the social harm of the defendant's behavior was low. It should be taken into account in sentencing.

3. Ning Jinfeng has a good attitude in admitting guilt, and is a first-time offender and an occasional offender

According to the case file materials provided by the prosecutor, Ning Jinfeng has never been criminally punished, and after being arrested, he voluntarily confessed all his crimes, pleaded guilty and accepted punishment, and his subjective malice was small.

To sum up, the defender believes that the parrots involved in the case, which are listed as national key protected animals, have relatively large populations in the wild, and are all species with relatively mature artificial breeding technology and huge breeding scale, which are relatively common pet birds in practice; Defendant Ning Jinfeng had a license to artificially breed the parrots involved in the case, and the parrots sold were all second or third generations of children who had been purchased from a legal breeding institution and then artificially bred again, and the parental origin was clear; The parrots involved in the case were not sold to the pet market for the purpose of illegal release or consumption; At the same time, the defendant did not have other statutory aggravating circumstances, and did not cause serious consequences or related risks. In view of this, the court was requested to sentence the defendant below the statutory sentence, and the defender recommended that the defendant be sentenced to a suspended sentence.

Complete! Fang Yi said.

……

(End of chapter)