During the cross-examination, Fang Yi had no objections to other evidence, and only raised objections to the testimony of witnesses. The witness Dong Xia heard the victim say that someone raped her, but did not actually see it, so Fang Yi believes that the testimony of the witness Dong Xia cannot prove the facts of the case and does not recognize what he said.

"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.

The prosecutor will speak first. The presiding judge said.

“…… Defendant Hua Xiao pressed the victim Feng Yanyun against the wall of the corridor and forcibly assaulted her, and in the process, the victim pushed and shoved her with her hands. Just as the victim Feng Yanyun broke free from the defendant and was about to leave, the defendant pressed her against the wall again and forcibly had sex with her.

This court is of the view that the defendant violated Article 236 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China by forcibly having sex with a woman against her will, and that he should be investigated for criminal responsibility for the crime of rape, and we recommend that he be sentenced to five years imprisonment. Complete. The inspector said.

"The defendant defended himself." The presiding judge said.

"At that time, the victim only gently pushed me, she did not rush to leave after breaking free of my hands, and when I asked to have sex with her again, she did not object. We have a relationship voluntarily, I do not constitute a crime, please ask the court to judge according to law, and return me justice......" Hua Xiao said.

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

"Presiding Judge and Judge: The defender believes that in this case, the defendant Hua Xiao did not use violence, threats or other means to forcibly have sex with the victim against her will, so the defendant does not constitute the crime of rape. Here's why:

1. In this case, the defendant Hua Xiao did not have an X relationship against the woman's will.

First, according to the evidence on record, the safety exit of the nightclub was not closed, but was open, and people often smoked at the staircase or went to the underground parking lot through the security exit. During the relationship between the defendant and the victim, if the victim calls for help, it is impossible for no one to know. It can be seen from this that during the relationship between the parties, the victim did not call for help.

Second, both the defendant and the victim had been drinking alcohol on the night of the incident, but according to the surveillance video provided by the prosecutor, it can be seen that when the two walked out of the safety exit of the nightclub, their behavior was normal and they did not appear to be drunk.

Third, the defendant and the victim stayed at the corner of the stairs outside the exit for about half an hour, and before the relationship, the defendant and the victim had intimate movements, and although the victim refused, he did not make obvious resistance, and accepted the defendant's conduct afterwards. It can be seen that the defendant did not forcibly have sex with the victim against the woman's will.

Fourth, during the period when the two had a relationship in a back-to-back manner, the victim did not verbally refuse, nor did she beg for mercy or abuse, let alone resist by calling for help. The victim's behavior reflects his inner will, and if the victim does not cooperate with the posture of both parties (back position), it is impossible for the defendant to have a relationship with him.

2. The report to the police is not the true will of the victim.

According to the evidence on record, after the incident, the victim had a mobile phone, but he did not call the police at the first time, but after returning to the nightclub, his friend Dong Xia reported to the police after hearing that the victim had been raped. Therefore, the evidence in the case cannot prove that the report to the police was the true intention of the victim.

In summary, judging from the circumstances at the scene of the crime, the words, deeds, and posture of the defendant and the victim at the time of the crime, the existing evidence in the case is insufficient to prove that the defendant used violence, threats, and other means to have a relationship with the victim. The defender argued that the defendant and the victim had a relationship of their own free will, and that the defendant did not constitute the crime of rape. Complete. Fang Yi said.

"The prosecutor may respond to the defender's arguments." The presiding judge said.

"With regard to the defender's defense, we believe that the victim is not yet 18 years old, his cognitive ability to X is poor, and he does not have the ability to distinguish right from wrong and control his own behavior, so he was lured by the defendant to have a relationship with him, which was not his voluntary act, and the defendant constituted the crime of rape." The inspector said.

"The defender can respond to the prosecutor's comments." The presiding judge said.

"Based on the prosecutor's defense and response, the defense issued the following defense opinions:

1. The victim was already 17 years old at the time of the crime, and although he was not yet 18 years old, the available evidence cannot prove that the victim did not have the ability to distinguish right from wrong and control his own behavior.

2. According to the victim's statement, he works in a garment factory and is currently renting a house with his boyfriend, and the two are in a cohabitation relationship and have X experience. Therefore, the mere fact that the victim is under the age of 18 cannot be determined that the victim X has poor cognitive ability.

The defense argued that the victim understood the consequences of his actions and knew what the defendant was going to do when he took him out of the safe exit, and that the victim voluntarily had sex with the defendant, and that the defendant should not constitute the crime of rape. Complete. Fang Yi said.

……

“…… The collegial panel has deliberated and formed a verdict in this case. In response to the opinions of the prosecution and defense, combined with the focus of the dispute in this case, and based on the facts and evidence of this case, this court makes the following comments:

…… The evidence provided by the prosecution is insufficient to prove that the defendant forcibly had sexual relations with the victim against his will when he or she used violence, coercion, or other means to cause the victim to resist, unable to resist, or afraid to resist.

The defense opinions put forward by the defendant and the defender are to be adopted by this court. The prosecution charged the defendant with rape, but the evidence was insufficient to establish the alleged crime.

After discussion and decision by the adjudication committee of this court, in accordance with the provisions of articles 51 and 200 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, the judgment is as follows: The defendant Hua Xiao is not guilty. The presiding judge read out the verdict in court.

After hearing the verdict, the defendant Hua Xiao waved his right fist excitedly, and at the same time threw a grateful look at Fang Yi.

After the criminal verdict was issued, the procuratorate did not raise a protest, and the appeal period expired, and the criminal verdict took effect.

Zhang Jun counted, and the day after the court's criminal verdict took effect, she instructed Aunt Zhang to hand over 200,000 yuan in cash to Fang Yi.

In the director's office, Wan Kefa was smiling and making tea, and Fang Yi was sitting opposite him, sipping fragrant tea.

"Lao Wan, your tea doesn't feel right!" Fang Yi took a sip of tea and frowned.

(End of chapter)