"I think the victim Gu Chuanfu and the defendant Fang Yunlin are both at fault for the initiation of the case.

Although Gu Chuanfu's conduct threatened the personal and property safety of defendant Fang Yunlin, the antecedent was that defendant Fang Yunlin had instigated minors to participate in the theft.

The victim was only 13 years old when the two stole the cable together, and the victim was only 16 years old when he died. There is a high probability that the defendant will be sentenced to death. Zhou Ying swallowed the ice cream in her mouth and said.

Yun Qiao and Zhou Ying are very good, as long as the case is discussed within the team, whether it is right or not, the two of them dare to say it, and it is basically these two people who speak first every time, and they are definitely not cold.

In Zhou Ying's view, this is a rare opportunity to learn, before everyone speaks, to express their own thoughts, can avoid their own thinking being led by other lawyers, is conducive to recognizing their own shortcomings and improving their logical thinking.

Yun Qiao's idea is simpler, he feels that his brother-in-law organizes everyone to discuss the problem, he must not be cold, whether he thinks about it or not, he must throw bricks and lead the way, and at the same time, he can also verify his own ideas, anyway, he just got the certificate, and he is not afraid of people laughing at mistakes.

"Old Song, what do you think?" Fang Yi ate ice cream and looked at Song Hui, who was holding the ice cream thoughtfully.

"I don't think so. The victim Gu Chuanfu's conduct is not the victim's fault. Although Gu Chuanfu had violated the person and property of the defendant Fang Yunlin, the antecedent was that the two had jointly stolen and unfairly distributed the spoils, which was an internal conflict caused by the joint offender's artificial distribution of the spoils.

Gu Chuanfu's act of threatening and forcibly taking property in order to demand the theft of stolen money cannot be found to be the fault of the victim because Fang Yunlin took possession of the stolen money jointly stolen by the two, and Fang Yunlin should be severely punished in accordance with law because he does not have any statutory or discretionary mitigating circumstances. I expect the court to sentence him to death. Song Hui put down the ice cream and said.

"I agree with Lawyer Song." While Meng Guangda made a statement, he habitually brushed the hair on the top of his head, which was his signature action and a symbol of self-confidence.

"Well, the defendant in this case intentionally killed the victim because of the uneven distribution of the stolen goods, and the root cause was the stolen money, but the stolen money is not legal property, so it shouldn't be regarded as the victim's infringement of the defendant's property rights and interests, right?" Du Yong scratched his head, obviously not thinking through it yet, not sure.

"Master, what do you think?" Yun Qiao is still more accustomed to calling Master Fang Yi in the law firm, after all, it is a workplace, and it is not appropriate to call her brother-in-law.

"I agree with Lao Song's opinion that the victim's behavior of threatening the defendant to demand stolen money several times due to the uneven distribution of the stolen goods cannot be found to be the victim's fault." Fang Yi replied.

"Is it because the victim is recovering stolen money?" Zhou Ying asked.

"Hmm. "Victim's fault" in the sense of the Criminal Law refers to situations in which the victim intentionally commits an act that violates social ethics or violates the law, infringes upon the defendant's lawful rights or legitimate interests, and triggers the defendant to commit a crime or intensifies the degree of harm caused by the harm.

I remember that the "Minutes of the National Symposium on the Work of Criminal Trials in Courts to Maintain Stability in Rural Areas" stipulates that whether or not to impose the death penalty for intentional homicide should not only be based on whether the death of the victim was caused, but also on the overall circumstances of the case.

Lawyer Du, the last time we discussed a death penalty case you handled, I remember that we seemed to mention this summary, do you still have an impression? Fang Yi looked at Du Yong.

"Impressive. In that case, the victim was at fault and deliberately provoked trouble, and was stabbed to death by the defendant with a knife, and finally the court gave him a suspended death sentence.

I recall that the minutes stipulate that if the victim is clearly at fault or bears direct responsibility for the intensification of the conflict, or if the defendant has statutory mitigating circumstances, the death penalty should generally not be imposed for immediate execution. I used this summary of the case to defend the defendant.

For the first time, this summary explicitly introduces the victim's fault into the criminal sentencing system, and this provision mainly considers that in criminal cases where the interaction is very obvious, such as intentional homicide and intentional injury, where the victim is obviously at fault for the cause of the case or the intensification of conflicts, the defendant's subjective malice is relatively small, thus affecting sentencing, especially in cases where the death penalty may be applied. Du Yong replied.

"Yes, according to this summary, the main conditions that need to be met for the victim's fault are:

1. The defendant's criminal conduct must be directed at the victim of the wrongful act.

2. The victim must be intentional, because the victim's fault usually appears in crimes such as intentional homicide or intentional injury with obvious interactions, and simple negligent conduct or other acts that are not attributable to the victim cannot be found to be the victim's fault.

3. The victim must have committed a relatively serious violation of social ethics or the law.

The victim's fault is in nature an act that violates the law or violates morality, but not all faults can be evaluated by the criminal law, and only when it reaches a certain degree of severity can it be included in the criminal law evaluation system and become a discretionary sentencing circumstance.

The minutes clearly stipulate that the victim must be 'obviously at fault', and whether it is obvious or not should usually be judged by the understanding of ordinary people.

4. The victim's wrongful conduct must have violated the defendant's lawful rights or legitimate interests.

The so-called 'legitimate rights' are the interests that are expressly protected by the law, and the 'legitimate interests' generally refer to the interests that are not expressly provided for by the law, but are approved or recognized by the public in accordance with social ethics.

If the victim's illegal or negative conduct infringes upon the defendant's lawful rights or legitimate interests, and the defendant commits a criminal act against the victim as a result, the degree of criminal punishment that the defendant should receive will be relatively reduced.

5. The victim's wrongful conduct must be sufficient to cause the defendant to commit a criminal act or to intensify the harm caused by the harmful act.

The victim's wrongful conduct may not only trigger the occurrence of a criminal offense, but may also exacerbate conflicts in the crime, causing the defendant to increase the degree of harm.

The victim's wrongful act and the defendant's criminal act must have a causal link between the cause and the cause.

The above five articles are the main criteria for judging the fault of the victim in judicial practice, and you can refer to and apply them in similar cases in the future. Fang Yi said.

On the side, Yun Qiao's ten fingers flew up and down, rhythmically tapping on the keyboard, recording the opinions of everyone at the scene.

This record is not a formality, as long as the cases discussed at the meeting are recorded, so that when the case is reviewed after the verdict, it can be used to analyze the difference between the court's trial thinking and the team's opinion.