hats power

They suspected was a “rescue had been framed” case? The guy Wujun Dong Jinhua said: Last November, three-wheeled motorcycle he was driving from Jinhua City Town soup back to the village level temple, on the way beyond the Hu Qiming couple of electric bikes, after passing about ten meters, I heard someone behind fell to the ground, Wu Hu retrace rescue the couple, the two men sent to hospital after his father has advanced 1,000 yuan for medical expenses. But Hu insist: Wu is the perpetrator. Although the police can not determine whether there is collision, but the Jinhua Intermediate People’s Court in August this year a second trial, Wu to compensate 70,000 yuan.

Recently, the attorney for Wu Jundong good network of public and Chinese lawyers signed the agency agreement, Jinhua Municipal People’s Procuratorate to protest an application to the Zhejiang Higher People’s Court sent the application for retrial, the case renewed media attention.

Wu Jundong shouted innocent, saying he is “Peng Yu-second.” The fact that really the case? Court’s decision make sense?

Let me talk about October ignited Shanghai RT-Mart supermarket bus drivers’ rescue had been framed “case. Previously, the driver surnamed Yin says so: October 16, after he drove bus stop ready to start, see the car lying on the ground side of a old woman. Yin Mouli that arm off, police hospital. Granny died the next day. Yin driver told reporters: he helped the elderly, the passengers had to remind him not to go, be careful not a good report … good intentions … At that time, also tend to think that this is “saving had been framed.”

But eventually the police found out the truth, the fact is that in the case of the door is not closed, surnamed Yin to start the car, resulting in being off the old woman fell. Police identified the driver take full responsibility. Yinmou finally admitted: crowds misled him, was “a lot of people, and I said okay, I did not see …”

The case illustrates, not all “rescue had been framed,” the case is true, the perpetrators often not perceived their accident (Leaving aside the deliberate lie), in particular, minor rubs, endure crowded, and the “collision-free traffic accidents. ” The public should be a rational treatment of similar cases, “Peng Yu the second,” the name of the first deduction can not be arbitrary.

Let’s look at Jinhua case. Police could not confirm whether the two vehicles collide, scratching the case, the court Wu Jundong compensation, whether a repeat of the Peng Yu case of the “presumption of guilt” mean?

First of all civil cases to “preponderance of evidence”, the facts can be found. Case the court adopted the “high probability” principle: a witness confirmed that the motorcycle overtake electric cars from side to side two, after the car fell to the ground; Wu admitted, said his father was called: the “accident” a; on-site road level straight, good line of sight, lying on the ground of the electric car’s steering, braking performance standard. Based on the above facts, the court ultimately finds that: roll-over and Wu negligent driving motorcycle overtaking “causal relationship”, it imposes a responsibility to bear Qi Cheng.

Second, the Wu is driving three-wheeled motorcycle vehicle. “Butt car” (including “hit” non-motor vehicle) with the Peng Yu case of “human butt,” not the same as the principle of attribution: the case of Peng Yu, Yu-Peng Xu old woman to prove fault; and motor vehicle apply the “no fault liability “, the driver Wujun Dong Hu couples need to prove fault, and his disposition to take the necessary measures in order to reduce their own liability.

As a legal expert said: as long as proof of improper driving and accident drivers between the “causal relationship”, the driver should take responsibility, may not need to “have a physical on collision.” This is the so-called “non-collision accident.” This principle applies equally to Xuyun He case, collision-free does not mean that absolutely no traffic. Case the final outcome is unknown, but “have not hit pay” is indeed in the legal basis. This wide range of interpretation for the public, “Peng Yu Section N” case, provides a perspective.

Post comments in many articles made: Peng Yu is just the case of the good deeds of the “presumption of guilt” almost did not reproduce too. All the legal risks of doing good, not extremely suspicious, repeated the baseless assertion. However, motor vehicle accident to apply special responsibility principle, only to civil “preponderance of evidence”, the court can identify the fact that these professional legal knowledge, not just with ordinary intuition exactly the same.

Of course, this does not mean that in similar cases, media reports, lawyers involved in public service, public attention is much ado about nothing. Instead, these forces will make good those warm does not feel lonely, help treat social indifference.