The Joyful Rebirth of the "Sea Palace" — The Ultimate Revelation of the "Sea Palace" Case (Part 25)
Part Two: A Lawyer's Chivalry — Legal Rescue of the "Sea Palace"
11. Happy Rebirth
After seven or eight years of entanglement and struggle between rights and power, surviving countless tests of natural storms, enduring the ravages of two public opinion storms, and weathering nearly a year of struggle and confrontation both inside and outside the courtroom in administrative litigation, the "Sea Palace" (Hai Shang Huang Gong) still stubbornly survives between the blue sky and white clouds, the green mountains and azure sea of Dongshan Bay in Nan'ao—low-key but content. Some media outlets that do not know the truth have again come to pay attention to the "Sea Palace," but none have been able to stir up any public opinion storm. The meteorological "butterfly effect" theory holds that a butterfly gently flapping its wings can cause a storm, but this must rely on the complex mechanisms of atmospheric circulation. Because of the enormous impact of the "Sea Palace" administrative litigation case, the public has become more rational, the government more cautious, and the media more mature. The Jing Bao (Crystal Daily), which once stirred up public opinion storms against the "Sea Palace" in January 2010 and February 2011 but kept a low profile regarding the "Sea Palace" administrative dispute case heard twice in June 2011, once again focused on the latest developments of the "Sea Palace" on July 12, 2012, publishing related reports and editorials for three consecutive days, seemingly intent on recreating its past glory of leading public opinion. Yet it attracted almost no attention at all (Figures 93-98). This reflects that the level of understanding of the Jing Bao's reporters and editors regarding the "Sea Palace" incident has not improved in the slightest after two or three years of turmoil, and has clearly become "out of step with the times." Of course, as mentioned above, we cannot simply conclude that the Jing Bao was wrong from the very beginning. In fact, from beginning to end, they believed they stood on the side of justice and the side of the rule of law. Paradoxically, media supervision was supposed to promote law-based administration by government departments, but in the "Sea Palace" incident, the pressure of public opinion caused government departments to lose their bearings and commit unlawful administrative acts. Similarly, in recent years, there have also been problems of public opinion pressure interfering with the independent judiciary and with judges deciding cases according to law. The relationship between media supervision and the rule of law is a major subject worthy of in-depth research. From the "Sea Palace" incident and the "trial by public opinion" phenomena that have occurred from time to time in recent years, we can see that in a "society of the mediocre masses," as de Tocqueville called it, if media lacking sufficient legal rationality blindly cater to irrational social emotions, then the result of media supervision can only be a "tyranny of the majority," thus becoming the antithesis of the rule of law.
In May and June 2012, as the Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm, founded under the leadership of lawyer Zhiming, celebrated its twelfth anniversary, the "Sea Palace," which had narrowly survived its ordeal, took a brief respite. Guo, whose surname is Guo, invited Director Wang Tengfeng to bring colleagues from the firm for a visit, leaving behind many beautiful memories (Figure 99).
Extended Topic: Another vivid case of the relationship between public opinion supervision and judicial justice.
As noted in the "Extended Topics" section of the previous chapter, one of the lessons from the "Maritime Palace" administrative litigation case is that supervision by public opinion can not only promote law-based administration by the government, but can sometimes also "hijack" the government, leaving officials at a loss and prompting them to take unlawful administrative actions. Similarly, public opinion supervision has both positive effects and negative impacts on judicial independence and judicial fairness. In terms of its negative impacts, two issues stand out most prominently: first, some market-oriented media outlets, especially metropolitan newspapers, treat sensationalist coverage of hot-button cases as a "selling point" to open up markets. To attract public attention and boost sales, they often rely on reporting high-profile social issues that capture public interest for economic gain; second, instances of "hijacking" the judiciary through media and public opinion occur from time to time. In particular, when parties involved in certain cases cannot achieve their demands through normal channels, they turn to the media, attempting to sway court rulings by garnering public sympathy. Even some lawyers, when representing cases, violate professional ethics by seeking to use the influence of media and public opinion to achieve litigation objectives. The Li Tianyi and others alleged rape case, which caused a stir nationwide in 2013, is a vivid example. Both the defense lawyers and the victim's representative lawyers in that case engaged in some improper conduct and were subsequently disciplined by the legal profession. During the course of events, a well-known lawyer, who saw things clearly yet hated evil as much as an enemy and was always eager to speak out for justice, published four blog posts in succession, analyzing issues in meticulous detail and criticizing current malpractices, earning countless praise and admiration. The four blog posts are now compiled in chronological order below, serving as further evidence of this lawyer's chivalrous spirit.
The sexual rights of a bar hostess are equally inviolable
——Reflections on the Li Tianyi Rape Case
Recently, more and more media outlets have revealed that Li Tianyi's newly appointed defense lawyers, Chen Shu and Wang Ran, have loudly declared that they will mount a "not guilty" defense, citing their own past "glorious track records" as evidence, while also aggressively attacking the media and public opinion. From their words, I sense that their greatest trump card in turning defense into offense may be that the victim was a "bar girl," or even implying that the victim may have lured a minor into having "sexual relations," or perhaps directly accusing the victim of suspected wrongdoing such as "prostitution." In addition, the statement insinuates that the commercial song-and-dance entertainment venue was suspected of seriously corrupting minors, infringing upon the lawful rights and interests of Li Tianyi, a minor, and constituting a dark social phenomenon. Thus, combining the two, Li Tianyi, a minor, emerges entirely as a typical victimized youth who was lured, corrupted, and poisoned, completely passive. Not only should he not be a criminal, but he can also openly denounce and pursue the criminal liability of the perpetrators of "passive sexual relations," and further pursue the tort liability for reputation infringement against media and individuals who fueled "criticism" of Li Tianyi, damaging his reputation! Li Tianyi should be acquitted! Will things really develop as the Li family and their newly hired lawyers hope? We might as well conduct a preliminary analysis and judgment based on the law and the facts.
Firstly, laws and regulations such as the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Minors do indeed stipulate that commercial song-and-dance entertainment venues, internet access service venues, and similar establishments are not suitable for minors and shall not provide services to minors, and should strictly screen and prohibit minors from entering. However, the law does not stipulate that if entertainment venues or internet access venues provide services to minors in violation of regulations, they must bear joint criminal liability or substitute criminal liability for the criminal acts of such minors, nor does it stipulate that if entertainment venues or internet access venues violate management regulations by allowing minors to enter their premises for activities, such minors may be exempted from criminal liability if they subsequently violate the criminal law! As is well known, even if commercial song-and-dance entertainment venues or internet access service venues violate relevant management regulations, they can only bear corresponding administrative penalty liability, whether fines, license revocation, or administrative detention; in no case can the business premises bear criminal liability for the criminal acts of others!
Secondly, people have long been aware through online media that Li Tianyi is not an upright youth by nature, as he already carries a record of misdeeds. Moreover, judging from his daily words and deeds, he has changed cars several times, modified luxury vehicles, and has been raised in privilege since childhood—precocious, physically strong, and intellectually superior to ordinary youths. The law has long stipulated that under certain conditions, a person who has reached the age of sixteen can be considered to have "full capacity for legal conduct," and those who have reached the age of sixteen bear criminal responsibility for their crimes. From publicly available media information, Li Tianyi's minimum age is already seventeen, nearly an adult—let alone the fact that he seems to have already "matured early"! Therefore, the Li family's newly hired lawyer's insistence on hyping up the fact that Li Tianyi is a minor who deserves special protection is actually meaningless. Judging from Li Tianyi's own cognitive ability regarding social affairs and his capacity to discern his personal conduct, he seems to have long since had no need for special "protection"—otherwise, he would not be speeding around, scaling heights, and gathering crowds to cause trouble all day long!
Again, could the new defense lawyers for Li Tianyi, Chen Shu and Wang Ran, be self-congratulating on their "clever" defense tactics of leading people astray, until they might accuse the victim Ms. Yang of having "lured" Li Tianyi into sexual relations in court, or even directly insinuate that the victim was involved in "prostitution"? Should such assumptions become reality, if the two newly appointed lawyers truly employ such "clever" defense tactics in an attempt to exonerate Li Tianyi, it seems it would only backfire and produce the opposite result. This is because: first, regardless of whether Ms. Yang was a bar girl, and no matter how bar girls might lead people astray through their drinking companionship, this cannot serve as a justification for Li Tianyi to have committed sexual assault against a "bar girl." Even if the status of a "bar girl" is considered ever so "lowly," her right to bodily and "sexual freedom" remains inviolable! Second, assuming the victim does have a checkered past and is suspected of "a history of prostitution," and now, with the superb efforts of the two newly appointed lawyers, this has finally been uncovered, with sufficient "evidence" to infer that Li Tianyi "did not commit rape," then it would seem to suggest that the two previous teams of lawyers retained by the Li family were inferior in professional competence and professional ethics—lacking ability, diligence, and conscientiousness. Faced with such a major case involving the liberty of a person, they allegedly accomplished nothing and discerned nothing over a period of four months, while the newly appointed lawyers managed to find "evidence of innocence" within just one month—truly "extraordinary" skills! Similarly, this would further demonstrate how "incompetent" the public security and other government authorities must have been over the course of several months, only waiting for such brilliant lawyers to overturn the case and expose them to disgrace and blame! Is there any probability that such hypothetical inferences could become reality? Yes—but it absolutely does not exceed one in ten thousand! The hypothetical inferences in both scenarios above are most likely nothing more than wishful "Chinese dreams" of the Li family and their newly appointed lawyers! According to human sentiment, legal logic, and common sense, it is almost impossible—unless a divine being were to reappear in this world. Unfortunately, the era of divine beings reappearing no longer exists!
People must still return to reality to judge any matter or event, and the Li Tianyi case is no exception. As legal professionals, lawyers defending justice, speaking out for righteousness, and upholding judicial fairness is their inherent duty! However, in any case, a qualified lawyer must possess public morality and conscience. Anyone who loses public morality and conscience is unworthy of the title of lawyer—he can only be called a broker who knows the law. If that is so, then one can only say that the Li family's intentions were misguided and their choice of personnel was unwise!
To save others, one must have skill; a lawyer must have a bottom line; a person must have public morality; and society must have conscience. It is hoped that the outcome of this case will provide a fair and just account to all parties involved, to society, and to the law—rather than descending into a farce of sensationalism driven by personal fame and profit at the expense of others' lives and freedom. If that were to happen, it could only be said that the Li family, while their beloved son remains imprisoned, has been subjected to an additional layer of sorrow.
(Written by Attorney Zhiming, published on July 16, 2013)
The rule of law must not tolerate such "lawyers" toying with it.
——A Further Review of the Li Tianyi Rape Case
Li Tianyi's rape case has not yet been tried and finalized. It is entirely normal and beyond reproach that the public is following the case with intense discussion and heated opinion. What is astonishing, however, is that ever since the Li family retained Lan He, a man who calls himself a "lawyer," the situation has ballooned into something extremely abnormal! Right and wrong have become even more blurred, even turned on their heads. The case has been artificially complicated and made bizarre, public opinion has been wantonly distorted, the emotions of the people have suffered unprecedented deception, judicial independence has suffered unprecedented obstruction, and the social legal system has suffered unprecedented desecration! As for what the public should do in this case, what those involved should do, and what the judiciary should do, I will offer another discussion here to set the record straight:
1. Social rule of law must not be wantonly toyed with.
Since July 19, when Lan He, who自称 "lawyer" and was hired as legal advisor to the Li family, burst onto the scene, he first presented himself under the banner of clarifying the truth and refuting rumors. In his July 20 Weibo post, he deliberately emphasized, "Before the basic facts are ultimately determined by the judiciary, please observe rationally, refrain from harsh words, and do not project yourself into roles..." This seemed to reveal an instinctive goodwill, calling for an objective and rational approach to the event. But turn around and look—what did they actually do?
On July 21, the "lawyer" Lan He and others spread messages online exposing that "the victim was suspected of prostitution and extortion," and in an interview with a reporter from The Beijing News, smugly boasted: "Didn't you notice that after I came out, I've slightly reversed the situation?"
The journalist replied: "It just feels like this whole situation has gotten even more chaotic."
Lan He: "Fine, fine. The situation was already chaotic to begin with. This case is not that simple—there are cases within the case, and schemes within the scheme. Whether she (the victim) is actually a victim has yet to be determined and requires further verification" (Reported by Shi Wanglei and Zhang Yuan of The Beijing News).
On July 22, the "lawyer" Lan He again leaked misleading information to numerous media outlets and in his own blog posts (under the title "The Case Within the Case of Li Tianyi"), publicly claiming that "the judge has, through the pre-trial conference, accepted for investigation the criminal facts that relevant personnel on the victim's side are suspected of organizing prostitution and extortion; once verified, the persons involved will not escape the crime of false accusation." At the same time, he repeatedly emphasized, "Don't rush; everything is just beginning," implicitly suggesting: the best is yet to come; everyone wait and watch the show! Earlier that same day, Lan He also brazenly and deliberately played up to numerous media outlets: "After the pre-trial conference concludes, explosive news will be released to the media," and "There is a startling piece of news that will be announced to the media at the conclusion of the pre-trial conference; the news is explosive." (Legal Evening News, authors: Li Kui, Wang Xiaofei).
Correspondingly, on July 21, Tian Canjun, the attorney representing the victim Ms. Yang, responded to reporters from The Beijing News and other media: "Will these text messages affect the case?" (referring to the alleged extortion text messages circulating online),
Lawyer Tian replied: "No, I believe everyone can see that I haven't seen any substantial evidence from them. Now we just watch them stir things up, watch them perform. Either way, it definitely won't reverse the case. I'm not worried at all right now, and I won't comment. After the pretrial conference, the Li family held a press conference, and I was right there watching, to see how they would perform," fully displaying the professional conduct and demeanor of an upright, professional lawyer. The pretrial conference has already concluded, yet the shocking, explosive news from that "lawyer" Lan He still hasn't detonated to this day.
On July 23, the official website of the Beijing Higher People's Court, through its official Sina Weibo account "@京法网事", formally denied the rumor under the title "Media reports about 'court has carried out prostitution investigation' are untrue": "Yesterday, some media reported that in the case of Li Moumou and others suspected of rape, 'the court has carried out a prostitution investigation.' After verification, this information is false. The Haidian Court is currently handling the case expeditiously in accordance with the law." It can thus be seen that within less than a single week, this "lawyer" Lan He, by means of juggling tricks, exploited the differentiating function of textual and linguistic understanding to "cleverly" mislead and confuse the public, reaching the acme of such tactics. Unfortunately, this could not withstand the judicial authorities' solemn and just denial in a statement of merely a few dozen characters, and the trick collapsed of its own accord. The so-called court's carrying out of an investigation into the victim's suspected "prostitution" is purely false information deliberately disseminated by this "lawyer"!
II. Attempts to Overturn the Verdict by Fabricating a "Case Within a Case" Are Unlikely to Succeed
If the "case within a case" conceived and heavily publicized by the "lawyer" Lan He and others were established, would Li Tianyi automatically be acquitted of the rape charge? Obviously, this is by no means simple logical reasoning; it is likely nothing more than a wishful Chinese dream of Lan He and his associates. In my blog post on July 15, "The Sexual Rights of Bar Hostesses Are Equally Inviolable," I had already anticipated the escape route devised by the Li family and Lan He and others through their so-called "case within a case" scheme. Sure enough, they have now hastily revealed it. However, as things have developed, it seems they have exhausted all their tricks, and in the end, all they could expose was that "the victim is suspected of organizing prostitution and extortion."
Regarding this extraordinary matter, I will attempt the following analysis: Assuming that Lan He and others, who claim to be "lawyers," truly possess extraordinary abilities surpassing those of public authorities (public security and procuratorial organs), and could easily investigate and gather evidence to confirm that the victim, Ms. Yang, is a "prostitute" who colluded with a prostitution organization in jointly committing illegal acts for profit, and subsequently conspired to extort money from the Li family, with both subjective criminal intent and objective evidence being conclusive—this would not only expose the incompetence of the Li family's two previous lawyers, but could only be described as a tragedy for China's rule of law. During the investigation and prosecution process lasting nearly half a year, the criminal investigators and prosecutors were utterly unaware of this, and continued to make one error after another until today, when the case has been brought before the court for trial.
If the hypothetical scenario does not exist and the victim did not conspire with others to engage in prostitution and extortion on this occasion, even if the victim had the status of a "sex worker," as long as she was unwilling at the last moment, no one could forcibly rape her; otherwise, the crime of rape would still be established. Alternatively, even if there were an organized prostitution organization behind the victim that committed "extortion" against the Li family on this occasion, that would only constitute the criminal liability of certain members of that organization, and it could not simply offset the rape liability of Li Tianyi and the others. Moreover, to date, the defense has disclosed so-called "evidence" of extortion that is far-fetched and cannot be confirmed. Furthermore, even if Ms. Yang, the victim, had a shared intent to commit extortion after the fact, the outcome of this case would at most be similar to the "Lei Zhengfu and Zhao Hongxia" case, where each party is held liable for their own crimes, and Li Tianyi and the others still could not escape rape liability. The so-called "not guilty argument" can only ultimately be the self-indulgent fantasy of that "lawyer"—a farcical tale told to deceive the world and steal fame!
III. What Did the "Lawyer" Actually Do
Lan He, who calls himself a "lawyer," indeed made an extraordinary move the moment he stepped in, just as he smugly boasts—already wielding smooth talk and eloquence, effortlessly stirring up a monstrous wave, drastically worsening the case situation that had been calming down and was about to truly return to objectivity and rationality without disturbing judicial independence, churning up a pool of muddy water! However, who exactly is this "former senior journalist (well-known reporter), now 'lawyer'" Lan He?
The author was previously unfamiliar with this matter, and merely felt at the time that his conduct had already exceeded the professional ethics of an upright lawyer, attracting attention. Upon a brief inquiry, however, what came to light was startling—his character, his words, and his deeds all have deep-rooted origins. It may be fitting to directly record online writings for reference, so as to discern right from wrong.
Baidu personal profiles, Tencent Weibo, China Criminal Defense Lawyer website, and numerous other media promotional materials describe Lan He's self-introduction as "former senior journalist (well-known journalist), now lawyer"; while "China Forum" as early as October 22, 2011, published Zhao Manfu's article "Lan He Audaciously Plagiarizes and Usurps the Main Achievements of Other Lawyers," stating: "Lan He's lawyer practice certificate was only approved by the Beijing Municipal Bureau of Justice in January 2011. As a novice, instead of being modest and prudent and abiding by the law, he is arrogant and audacious, openly plagiarizing and altering the main achievements of other lawyers, fabricating case-handling experience, making up resumes, and lacking integrity, seriously deviating from lawyer professional ethics, violating lawyer management regulations, and should be subject to judicial punishment. He has the nerve to call himself part of the 'social elite' and a 'domestic criminal defense lawyer.' Of 'Lan He's fourteen' main achievements, thirteen were plagiarized and usurped from others. Even his resume and self-introduction were plagiarized and usurped from others—this is utterly immoral. That Beijing's legal profession has produced such a character as Lan He, and that Beijing Weiheng Law Firm has taken in such a character as Lan He, can be called a laughingstock for the whole world."
It is impossible for me to thoroughly verify the authenticity of online writings in a short period of time. I will not make subjective judgments here and provide this only for reference, hoping that the public can comprehensively analyze and evaluate whether there is any fairness in assessing the person, their character, their words, and their deeds.
IV. Conclusion
This case was originally indeed an ordinary criminal case, but due to the involvement of a celebrity's child and a rich second generation, it has drawn considerable public attention, heated discussion, and criticism. As the suspect's side, Li Tianyi and his family should understand and accept this. It is normal and reasonable for the public to uphold social justice and condemn evil and guilt. Frequent criticism and moderate commentary are understandable, and of course, appropriate statements and explanations from the offending party are also acceptable.
Unfortunately, the Li family, likely under the guidance of "masterminds" and backed by "influential figures," has shown no goodwill toward the injured party. Instead, they have repeatedly hired "experts" to rescue them. In particular, around July 19, when they brought in Lan He, who自称 a "lawyer," they shifted from defense to offense, using labels such as "bar girl," "prostitute," "extortionist," and "false accuser" to stigmatize and defame the victim, undermining the victim's resolve. Through a整套 magical, dreamlike combination of tactics, they have blurred the line between truth and falsehood, muddled right and wrong, in an attempt to mislead the public, manipulate public opinion, and hijack the rule of law. Nevertheless, I firmly believe that China's judiciary today is no longer so fragile. We hope—and have ample reason to believe—that the independence and fairness of China's judiciary remain something to be anticipated in the Li Tianyi rape case.
In reality, all these chaotic practices and unorthodox maneuvers are utterly incapable of truly resolving the predicament of one's own "guilt." Their sole purpose is to exert intense pressure to force others into submission, hoping to coerce them into compromising and abandoning their pursuit of accountability. In this way, one might remove the root cause, then pull strings up and down the chain, reducing a major issue to a minor one and a minor one to nothing, ultimately concluding with a de facto "not guilty" disposition. Yet even in this plea for rescue, the methods employed compound error upon error, rendering the situation irreparable. This brings to mind that a professional lawyer, in fulfilling their duties and abiding by the law, should properly respond to wrongdoing and help others resolve their predicaments through correct means in accordance with legal regulations—and must never presume to wield "cleverness" to play "tricks," unaware that there is always a sky beyond the sky, and that heavenly justice cannot be deceived!
The author has said in a previous blog post: saving people requires skill, lawyers must have a bottom line, law demands public morality, and society needs conscience! As members of society and members of the legal profession, upholding social justice and legal conscience is everyone’s responsibility.
The rule of law must not be defiled, the people must not be fooled, and society must not be deceived. Those pests of the legal profession who exhaust every means to play word games and legal tricks should stop now, and return to society and the rule of law a measure of purity and fairness. Otherwise, those who play with fire will eventually burn themselves! Fellow lawyers should cherish their own integrity and take this as a caution!
(Signed: Non-professional lawyer: Zhiming Lawyer, July 24, 2013)
Further Reflections on the Li Tianyi Case
—Third Commentary on the Li Tianyi Case
Court announcement: The Li Tian case was publicly heard on August 28, with proceedings lasting two days. The dust is about to settle, and the mystery is about to be unveiled. At this moment when the chaotic situation is on the verge of being straightened out and clarified, I take a brief moment to look back and reflect, offering the following commentary:
1. The Li family's errors in handling the case are as follows: In this case, Li Tianyi was suspected of rape, and he already had a prior record of misconduct. It is understandable that the public harbors resentment toward the wealthy and powerful, and hates seeing spoiled rich kids harm society. Moreover, as public figures, Li Shuangjiang and Meng Ge should naturally bear more social criticism, censure, and scrutiny than other public figures. However, regrettably, the third pair of lawyers hired by the Li family, Chen Shu and Wang Gui, began to act against common sense and decency by opposing and resisting public opinion. Even worse, the Li family's "legal advisor" Lan He resorted to all means to spread rumors, stir up trouble, and recklessly create hype, lacking both morality and legal integrity, seriously crossing the bottom lines of law and ethics. They attempted to use media momentum to mislead the public, divert attention, distort facts, and interfere with the judiciary to reverse their losing position, which provoked even stronger backlash and fierce opposition from those in society with a sense of justice! ② If we, as the Li family's senior legal advisors, had indeed investigated and discovered leverage against the victim, "confirmed" that the victim was at fault, and that Li Tianyi had been "wronged," then it absolutely should not—and could not—be a reason to recklessly leak information and stir up hype in advance, attempting to attract public attention to gain approval and influence judicial proceedings. Such a fundamentally wrong move not only intensified the harm and violation of the victim, but also hurt the broad masses of citizens, scholars, and experts across the nation who possess even a modicum of social conscience and sense of justice! More seriously, it directly "harmed" the Li family themselves: while triggering even greater backlash and resentment, it allowed the victim's side and the public to prematurely absorb the impact of the "factual evidence" ammunition the Li family held, reducing the likelihood of judicial personnel identifying with their claims. From this, it is clear that the prospects for the Li family's "legal experts" to dream of acquittal are slim! What a pity, what a tragedy. It is regrettable that the Li family thought they had found top-tier talent who could save them in their hour of need, but in reality, they were undeserving of that reputation. With one wrong move after another, defeat was inevitable. It is lamentable that the Li family never had the fortune to encounter true experts who could turn the tide and rescue them from the brink!
I believe that true experts will not make public moves and launch attacks from all directions before trial, nor resort to immoral and illegal tactics, firing dud shells and rotten bombs continuously, giving the other side opportunities to patch their "loopholes," identify their own weaknesses, and mount fierce counterattacks. Instead, they will thoroughly prepare all "evidence materials" as powerful "ammunition" and unleash it all at once in the courtroom with full force—"bombarding" the opponent so devastatingly that it delivers a single fatal blow, leaving the other side no chance to regroup or remedy. At the same time, they will supplement this with comprehensive positive media coverage. When necessary, their claims and reasoning can also be submitted in writing to judicial authorities in advance for verification of the relevant facts and evidence—but never with fanfare or hype, which would only invite defeat!
II. Errors in the handling of the case by Ms. Yang's lawyer: During the early and middle stages, when the Li family mounted a fierce counterattack, he remained silent and unresponsive, missing many opportunities to uphold justice. He allowed the Li family's legal counsel to exaggerate and freely attack the "stains" on Ms. Yang's character, enabling rumors to spread, giving rise to certain speculation and doubt in society, and misdirecting the course of public opinion. Such inaction was indeed a mistake. Now that the trial is approaching, the merits of the case have essentially been settled, and the proper course would have been to remain silent to avoid stirring up further complications that might interfere with the normal judicial proceedings. Yet instead, he unnecessarily created trouble, made unauthorized disclosures, and leaked internal information about the victim's mental breakdown under overwhelming pressure and her hospitalization for medical treatment, thereby handing others ammunition to diminish her advantage, influencing the public's ability to judge, disturbing the impression of right and wrong, and to a certain extent undermining a victory that was nearly within reach!
This is a clear manifestation of serious imprudence and incompetence, which truly makes those with hearts full of justice and who raise the banner of fairness sigh in regret and helplessness! I hope this mistake will not affect the overall situation, and that wise judges can still, amid the complexities, clarify right from wrong, grasp the key issues, and determine guilt or innocence! Give the people an upright and honest ruling, render justice to society, and let the rule of law manifest true justice!
Thirdly, regarding the guilt or innocence in this case, no matter how the other issues are debated, it is all in vain. There is only one point that is the critical crux of life and death in the debate between the two sides: at the very moment sexual relations began, was the woman willing and consenting, or was she coerced and threatened? Nothing else matters — right and wrong will be immediately judged, guilt or innocence will be clearly distinguished! Let us wait and see!
(Zhiming Lawyer, August 28, 2013)
The Tragic Crime and Fault of the Li Tianyi Case and the Immoral Misconduct of Beijing Lawyers
——Fourth Commentary on the Li Tianyi Case
I originally did not want to get involved again in the tedious topic of Beijing lawyers sensationalizing the Li Tianyi case, but I am compelled to comment once more for the following two reasons:
First, since the early 1970s, I have grown up happily listening to impassioned revolutionary songs such as Li Shuangjiang's "The Red Star Lights My Way to Battle," and in my young heart, a deep affection for the military singer-artist Mr. Li Shuangjiang was already planted, which remains undiminished to this day. I feel it is necessary to make a fair assessment of the tragic wrongdoing in the alleged rape case involving his beloved son, Li Tianyi. Second, recently in the capital city, a sensationalist lawyer surnamed Lei has emerged, who, in a shameless quest for fame, has actually written an article revealing astonishing claims, saying: "In the Li Tianyi rape case, the victim, a woman surnamed Yang, had previously colluded with hostile forces overseas to bring down and smear China's 'red second generation'." I can no longer tolerate this. Seeing the image of Chinese lawyers collapsing and being destroyed in the eyes of people both at home and abroad, I feel it stuck in my throat like a fishbone, and I must once again speak out in righteousness to denounce such scum!
1. The Tragic Crime and Fault of the Li Tianyi Case
Li Tianyi's case involving suspected rape (gang rape) had a closed-door court session at the end of August, and the court has now adjourned pending judgment. Reviewing the entire progression of the case, the author offers the following observations:
(1) Indulgence leading to crime is a profound lesson: Li Tianyi is the beloved son born to Li Shuangjiang, who remarried a young wife in his old age. Observing the degree of doting: when Tianyi was young, Mr. Shuangjiang "served as his horse and ox" (being ridden); as he grew older, while carefully cultivating his extraordinary talents, he was also adorned in gold and silver and given whatever he wanted. At just 15 years old, he was already given a car to drive alone, flaunting his wealth and causing trouble. In September 2011, the young Tianyi was sentenced to one year of re-education through labor for fighting and injuring others. After his release in September 2012, his parents, instead of disciplining him strictly, covertly rewarded and comforted him by purchasing a new luxury car, allowing Tianyi to become even more brazen in flaunting his wealth and pride. The young boy made friends widely and frequented nightclubs, ultimately leading to his arrest on suspicion of rape and gang rape!
(2) The existing appearance of the evidence makes it difficult to escape conviction: Whether Li Tianyi can be found guilty in the alleged rape (gang rape) case remains uncertain after multiple rounds of procedural maneuvering and public posturing. Yet the related "evidentiary facts" that have become nearly public still preliminarily indicate that Li Tianyi is very likely guilty and will find it difficult to escape conviction. No matter how firmly Meng Ge insists that this is a "wrongful conviction" or "miscarriage of justice," judicial authorities can only adjudicate based on all existing lawfully obtained evidence presented in court—that is, formal evidence on its face. Based on currently available public information, Li Tianyi will find it hard to evade criminal punishment!
(3) The grievance is profound, with lingering doubts: In this case, multiple parties involved (including no shortage of "legal experts") have publicly disclosed case information, and especially after the court hearing, much key case-related information has been revealed. Looking at the facts themselves, the question of guilt versus innocence in this case is indeed rather mixed and difficult to define. Unfortunately, as far as rape is concerned, it is itself a high-voltage, high-risk category of criminal case and a key target for crackdown — one must not touch it, and once implicated, it is very difficult to extricate oneself. Moreover, in reality there are indeed many situations in which "rape" occurs in a vague state of half-persuasion and half-resistance, not to mention the possibility that certain "pre-set traps" may exist. However, as of today, looking at the chain of guilt evidence connected by established lines of reasoning, it appears to have taken complete shape, making it difficult to overturn the finding of guilt. Unless divine assistance comes, or a righteous judge is reborn to ascertain that there are indeed other hidden circumstances in this case, and that Tianyi is truly wronged?! As a listener, I love Li Shuangjiang, and I hope Li Tianyi is fine; but I love the rule of law and justice even more, and I believe the Beijing Haidian District Court can sort out right from wrong amid the complex and chaotic situation, render the correct judgment, and decide the case fairly!
2. The Immoral and Unethical Conduct of Beijing Lawyers
(1) Immoral, illegal, shameless, and despicable: Since the Li Tianyi rape case broke out at the end of February this year, the reasons it drew intense attention from all sectors of society in its early stages were: he was both a "rich second generation" and a "celebrity second generation," and he was again suspected of committing a crime shortly after being released from re-education through labor. As reported by The New York Times on August 29: "Under the eager scrutiny of local media, a rape case began trial in Beijing on Wednesday, becoming yet another spectacle in China's legal landscape, drawing attention to the lifestyles of the elite class and their alleged misdeeds." The subsequent development was entirely caused by a batch of immoral, illegal, shameless, and despicable lawyer scum: First to take the stage were Chen Shu and Wang Ran, who claimed to be acquaintances of the police and had successful cases of exonerating clients. As soon as they appeared, they loudly proclaimed: they would mount a not-guilty defense, accusing Yang of being a bar girl involved in impropriety and suggesting the bar itself was also under criminal suspicion. After being somewhat suppressed, a lawyer surnamed Lan took the stage next, calling himself the Li family's "legal counsel" with authority over all of the Li family's press statements and legal guidance. As soon as he appeared, he deployed his talent for sensationalism (having a journalist background), bombarding public opinion and fellow legal professionals, openly clamoring that Li Tianyi was innocent, that Yang was involved in prostitution and conspired with the bar to commit extortion and other crimes. He kept fabricating stories and leaking information, was repeatedly denounced by the public, and repeatedly rebutted by the court. Lan He was in front, Xi was behind; the front sang and the back harmonized, echoing each other from afar. Public opinion was seething, people's nerves were shattered, the conscience of the rule of law was sullied, and moral bottom lines were broken! Public outrage became unstoppable, and Tianyi was put on the fire to roast! By the time Lan He hid behind the scenes, confining himself to a mourning hall and feigning silence, Meng Ge charged into battle herself, but it was already too late to save the situation! Extending into the courtroom and after the trial, it was also revealed that lawyer Li Zike, in order to become a deputy to the People's Congress or a member of the CPPCC, had sought to become Li Tianyi's defender and held secret talks with Meng Ge about cooperating, but the collaboration did not materialize, and he was suspected of harmful conduct—this insider information also disappointed and disgusted the public. One would have thought it ended there, that Beijing lawyers had already embarrassed themselves enough. But who would have expected that what would make the nation and even fellow lawyers' jaws drop was still to come? Just days after the adjournment, in early September, an even more outrageous character burst onto the scene, claiming to be a "mastermind" and spewing shocking nonsense: that the Li Tianyi case was a "honey trap" conspiracy between Yang and hostile foreign forces, aimed at bringing down China's "red second generation." This thunderous absurdity was simply speechless-inducing and laughable! As Zhao Xianjun exposed in his blog post "Stripping Off Lei Haijun's Underpants" about Lei Haijun's unethical conduct in seeking but failing to become the defense attorney: "This is the first most shameless奇葩 I have ever seen. I originally overestimated Lan He's shamelessness; Lei Haijun, you surpass Lan He three times over!" The author deeply agrees. The author has practiced law for nearly thirty years and this time has fully witnessed the astonishing spectacle of the Beijing legal community's bizarre blooms! There are a few other minor Beijing lawyers who trim their sails and hitch a ride to pick the peaches, but they are not worth mentioning here. Is this seemingly the "brand" style of Beijing lawyers?!
(2) Unskillful and self-serving to the detriment of others: Looking at the various shameless antics and misconduct of the clownish "lawyers" parading across the stage in the capital, the litigation profession that I have passionately devoted myself to for decades has been deeply wounded, to the point that my firm professional convictions have nearly been shaken. Not only do members of society disdain them, but even a committed professional lawyer like myself feels deep shame and embarrassment over the emergence of a cohort of degenerate lawyers in the capital's legal profession! In truth, the Li Tianyi case has reached its current disastrous outcome entirely because of the selfish desires and incompetence of those bizarre lawyers in the capital. As one such bizarre lawyer, Li Zaihe, described it in the manner of an actuary: the probability of the rape charge being established in this case is 50.0001%, which broadly conveys that the facts of this case are indeed complicated and tangled, ambiguous and difficult to clarify, with right and wrong hard to define. It seems the defense side also possesses a large amount of devastating "evidence." If so, Chen Shu, Wang Ran, Lan He, You Xi and others should never have vigorously exploited media hype and exposure before trial. Instead, they should have made thorough preparations in advance, linked the evidence into a chain, and deployed their "secret weapons" at critical moments, catching the opposition off guard during courtroom proceedings. That would have achieved victory in one decisive stroke, with a strong possibility of a fatal and successful blow—the odds of acquittal would have been far greater than the effect of piecemeal disclosures that allowed the "enemy" to prepare and neutralize their impact! From Mr. Shuangjiang's perspective, the missed opportunity to strike is truly deplorable and heart-wrenching. Even after the trial concluded, this shameless character came out with absurd fabrications. Having failed to secure a defense role in the first instance, he attempted to seize the spotlight in the second instance to grab an opportunity as defense counsel—truly disgraceful!
In fact, in writing this article, the author took a brief look at the shocking lawyer's "interview" on Sohu. The entire piece was filled with Hubei-accented, mumbling, incoherent, slow-witted, and muddled legal-illiterate language: things like "one defendant tried to settle for 100,000 yuan in court, but criminal cases cannot be settled privately" (showing utter ignorance that compensating the victim is itself a discretionary mitigating circumstance demonstrating good attitude in sentencing), things about "a honey trap," things like "I predict it will be convicted as gang rape but sentenced under the crime of group licentiousness," and things like "Lawyers Chen Shu and Wang Ran already withdrew from the defense in July!" Hearing his words, one hears nonsense; watching his actions, one sees shifty eyes. Without even needing Zhao Xianjun to expose his ugly face of sour grapes—claiming the grapes are sour because he cannot reach them—it is already clear he is not a good person! The author believes that even on appeal, just as Li Zai Ke failed to secure the defense at first instance, you, "Thunder-death," will also fail to secure the defense at second instance. Because you are even more technically inept and morally corrupt, disregarding your conscience for fame, profit, and selfish desires, fabricating nonsense and telling barefaced lies. You have no stance, no principles, no morality, no conscience, no justice—only self-interest. Iron-shouldered righteousness, speaking out for justice, unyielding before might, unswayed by poverty—these are utterly alien to your kind. The few rogue lawyers in the capital are not only unworthy of defending Li Tianyi; you lack even the basic qualities of a lawyer and are unworthy of being colleagues in the legal profession! With your kind meddling in the Li Tianyi case, he is bound to be harmed!
(3) The reason lies in institutional defects.
Originally, the public attention drawn by Li Tianyi's alleged rape case was a perfectly normal phenomenon. Yet what perplexes so many people is: how could such a minor case involving Li Tianyi expose so many and such notorious scum of the legal profession in the capital? In my view, it can be attributed to no more than the following two prominent reasons: First, excessive concentration of resources breeds corruption and evil. Vast China, capital of a great nation, has accumulated over sixty years of incomparably abundant political, economic, cultural, media, and other resources in a single city. Looking at countries around the world, none can compare (the United States has political power in Washington and economic power in New York; Australia's political, economic, and cultural centers are respectively in Canberra, Melbourne, and Sydney; South Africa's political, economic, and cultural hubs are likewise spread across three cities). With Beijing's capital so highly monopolized and centralized, long-term immersion and saturation in privilege naturally breeds corruption and evil, and the pursuit of fame and fortune becomes the prevailing fashion—the legal profession is no exception! Second, for a long time, various national functional departments have prioritized economic interests above all else in performance appraisals. In the legal profession, all honors, awards, and promotions are based primarily on economic revenue targets, with a severe lack of practical emphasis on moral integrity, justice, and conscience. The positive energy of human fairness and conscience has been severely suppressed and neglected. Over time, this has subtly guided lawyers to value profit over righteousness and to resort to any means in the scramble for fame and gain, which has become an unconscious habit. To become famous, to become a representative, to make more money, stopping at nothing becomes an inevitable trend. As the capital leads the national legal profession, having long been subject to misguided direction where negative energy of moral decay and lawlessness prevails, it is hardly surprising that bizarre lawyers keep emerging in the capital! To this, colleagues nationwide should only observe from afar and never draw near! Do not compare, and need not envy! Being an honest person and practicing law with integrity—this is the long-lasting path of justice! To be a righteous lawyer with moral conscience, legal bottom lines, and superb skills remains our steadfast commitment! Let those contemptible garbage lawyers of the capital go to hell; we still happily pursue the pure and noble legal profession! To put an end to such ugliness and misconduct in the capital's legal circles, should the capital's legal administration authorities and the nation's legal administration authorities reflect and take action?!
(Non-lawyer, Zhiming Lawyer, September 9, 2013)
(The second series is finished, to be continued)
