Dacheng Prevents Supreme People’s Court from Approving Death Penalty for Client
A man surnamed Zhao was sentenced to death by the Intermediate People’s Court of Baoding for arson that killed one and injured another severely. Zhao appealed to the High People’s Court of Hebei Province but the court upheld the original verdict. This upset Zhao’s family. When the case was to be sent to the Supreme People Court for review, they resorted to Dacheng attorneys Zhang Zhiyong, Zhang Xidong and Du Yonghao for help.
The attorneys met Zhao at the detention center, checked profiles at the High People’s Court of Hebei Province, inspected the scene and collected evidence there. After doing a lot of defense, they submitted “Attorney’s Opinion on Not Approving Death Sentence” to the Supreme People’s Court and provided relevant evidence. In their opinion, the incident took place on a piece of clearing, rather than a bustling shopping street. This proved that Zhao did not have the intention to endanger public security or cause any death. Zhao’s behavior should constitute the crime of intentional destruction of property and negligent homicide, not arson. After the incident, Zhao followed his family’s advice and reported himself to the public security bureau as early as possible, admitted guilt and showed penitence. What’s more, Zhao’s family had always been proactive and sincere in compensating the victims’ family. They borrowed money from all sources and transferred it to the court’s bank account.
The Supreme Court judge undertaking the case met the attorneys and discussed with them determination of the nature of the case, measurement of penalty and compensation. The judge also suggested the attorneys assist Zhao’s family in compensating the victim’s family and winning over their forgiveness.
The attorneys tried to negotiate with the victim’s family. As they required large sums of compensation, the negotiations came to a standstill for a few times. But the attorneys did not lose heart. They mobilized all resources to persuade the family members and suggested the people’s court preside over the mediation. The High People’s Court of Hebei and the Supreme Court judge undertaking the case mediated twice. For both times, the attorneys were present and had sincere discussions with the victims’ family.
The attorneys’ work moved the victims’ family members and the judge. A compensation agreement was finally concluded and the victims’ family members showed forgiveness toward Zhao. On March 26, 2015, the Supreme People’s Court decided not to approval Zhao’s death penalty and referred the case back to the High People’s Court of Hebei for a retrial.
The successfully defense for Zhao’s life shows the attorneys’ sense of social responsibility, humanitarianism and expertise.
The attorneys met Zhao at the detention center, checked profiles at the High People’s Court of Hebei Province, inspected the scene and collected evidence there. After doing a lot of defense, they submitted “Attorney’s Opinion on Not Approving Death Sentence” to the Supreme People’s Court and provided relevant evidence. In their opinion, the incident took place on a piece of clearing, rather than a bustling shopping street. This proved that Zhao did not have the intention to endanger public security or cause any death. Zhao’s behavior should constitute the crime of intentional destruction of property and negligent homicide, not arson. After the incident, Zhao followed his family’s advice and reported himself to the public security bureau as early as possible, admitted guilt and showed penitence. What’s more, Zhao’s family had always been proactive and sincere in compensating the victims’ family. They borrowed money from all sources and transferred it to the court’s bank account.
The Supreme Court judge undertaking the case met the attorneys and discussed with them determination of the nature of the case, measurement of penalty and compensation. The judge also suggested the attorneys assist Zhao’s family in compensating the victim’s family and winning over their forgiveness.
The attorneys tried to negotiate with the victim’s family. As they required large sums of compensation, the negotiations came to a standstill for a few times. But the attorneys did not lose heart. They mobilized all resources to persuade the family members and suggested the people’s court preside over the mediation. The High People’s Court of Hebei and the Supreme Court judge undertaking the case mediated twice. For both times, the attorneys were present and had sincere discussions with the victims’ family.
The attorneys’ work moved the victims’ family members and the judge. A compensation agreement was finally concluded and the victims’ family members showed forgiveness toward Zhao. On March 26, 2015, the Supreme People’s Court decided not to approval Zhao’s death penalty and referred the case back to the High People’s Court of Hebei for a retrial.
The successfully defense for Zhao’s life shows the attorneys’ sense of social responsibility, humanitarianism and expertise.