On November 22, 2013, Wang was caught on the spot by the local public security agency while she was organizing people into making bombs and electric detonators at her own chicken farm with 30.22 kilograms of gunpowder. Wang’s family came to attorney Song Yuncang for help.
On the basis of preliminary evidence collection and his understanding of the facts, relevant laws and judicial interpretations, as well as the fact that Wang raised no objection to the facts, Song decided that the case depended on whether Wang’s explosive-making was driven by productive and/or everyday living needs, and whether it belonged to the “gravity-of-the-circumstances” category defined in judicial interpretations.
Song also referred to similar cases and decisions issued by courts in other provinces. At the trial of first instance, he argued that Wang was driven by productive and/or everyday living needs and the circumstances were not grave and that if decisions on similar cases made recently by courts in other provinces and the court in question were considered, Wang should be sentenced to no more than three years in prison and eligible for probation.
Unfortunately, the court of first instance exaggerated the potential social harm of Wang’s behavior and disregarded court decisions on two similar cases (one was tried by the court itself) whereby defendants were punished lightly and were even granted probation, and on the basis of their rigid, mechanical interpretation and application of law, the court sentenced Wang to ten years’ imprisonment.
Wang and her family refused to accept this. After meeting Song and communicated their thoughts, they agreed to let Zhou Hong, a colleague of Song at Dacheng’s Kunming office, represent them and file an appeal to the Intermediate People’s Court of Yuxi. Song and Zhou worked together to sort out their train of thought and defense strategies. Eventually, they decided to elaborate more fully the original arguments, prepare a thoughtful pleading, communicate more thoroughly with the presiding judge at the court of appeal, and present to the court written judgments on similar cases issued by Jiangchuan People’s Court and the Intermediate People’s Court of Yuxi as well as feedback from the village where Wang lived on the first instance decision that pleaded the court of second instance to treat Wang less harshly.
The attorneys’ seamless cooperation and plausible defense in the court of second instance persuaded the judge to amend the original judgment and impose on Wang lighter punishment. In so doing, they successfully protected the defendant’s legitimate rights and interests.