The courtroom scene was as boring as ever.
After all, watching two people constantly submitting evidence and then the other party denying it, it would feel like the image of lawyers in your mind suddenly collapsed.
Of course, this is obviously due to hype.
As for Zhou Yi's audience, many of them have watched the previous live broadcast of the trial, so they know very well that the trial is really that boring.
It's not like what is shown in TV dramas, where the lawyer speaks passionately and his voice is so loud that it seems like it can shake the house down and there is a reason for it.
In a court trial, evidence is still important.
Many people who have participated in court trials actually don’t quite understand the evidence presentation and cross-examination process.
For example, in this trial, the first two pieces of evidence Zhou Xinran produced were not the Zhou Yi test evidence they were familiar with, nor the test report from a third-party testing agency.
And what is it? The first piece of evidence is the evidence that Oupian Company released the Oupian mobile phone, proving that the Oupian mobile phone is the mobile phone produced and sold by Oupian Company.
The second piece of evidence is a pile of shopping invoices Zhou Yi received after buying a mobile phone in the offline store of Oupian Company. The third piece of evidence is a video of a pile of unopened Oupian mobile phones being unpacked on the spot and distributed to company employees for testing.
These two pieces of evidence are intended to prove that the mobile phones used by the company for testing were purchased directly from the Oupian Company and were tested without going through any other procedures.
There is a problem here. When Zhou Yi asked company employees to conduct tests, he asked them to take photos of their mobile phone test results. That evidence is obviously unusable.
When I went to get the notarization done, it was rejected because without these pre-installed programs, I couldn't prove that the so-called undeletable apps in these phones were installed by the phone manufacturers.
Therefore, the only evidence brought to court were the test results of the new phones.
Fortunately... these phones all have slow apps.
To many people who have never been involved in litigation, this is just a trivial matter. How could our mobile phones install things that cannot be uninstalled?
But this is actually necessary evidence, because you may not do it, but the dealer may do it.
Please note that we are talking about distributors here, not the direct stores operated by the Oupian Company itself.
So the other party naturally has no objection to these evidences.
Then comes the key evidence, the test video, the test that some pre-installed software in the phone cannot be uninstalled, and the test results of a third-party professional organization.
"I have no objection to the authenticity of the evidence, but I do object to the strength of the proof!"
As for why there was an objection, Lawyer Zhang directly said: "First, the test sample was too small. Only a single model of mobile phone was tested."
"Secondly, the only uninstall methods chosen were screen uninstall and uninstall within the app manager. No other uninstall methods were used. Therefore, we do not recognize the strength of the two pieces of evidence!"
What do you mean? My phone has other uninstall methods, but they are not used in your video. So your video can only prove that these pre-installed software cannot be uninstalled using the tested method, but it cannot prove that these pre-installed software cannot be uninstalled at all!
I think you can understand it now.
As for how to uninstall, there must be a way. If the mobile phone manufacturer does not even have this method for its own products, then what is the point of using it?
This was the stage of evidence presentation and cross-examination, and Attorney Fang did not speak.
But the crowd watching the live broadcast couldn't help it anymore.
"Fuck, this is just some quibble. I've tried so many ways to uninstall it and it still won't work. Do we have to learn programming to uninstall apps on our phones?"
"This is a court trial, but why do I feel like... why do I feel like someone is being unreasonable? Why hasn't Lawyer Fang said anything? I feel like if I were there, it would probably turn into a fight."
Unlike the indignant netizens, Zhou Yi was very calm and even started discussing the logical relationship with his older brother who was also there to listen.
As long as it can be deduced logically, you cannot say there is anything wrong with other people's debate.
Soon, the cross-examination was over, and today's trial judge, Wang Pengju, said, "Let's begin the court debate."
Finally, it came to this point. Mr. Fang moved his wrist, causing Zhang Minghua opposite him to suddenly widen his eyes.
Let’s debate, but don’t fight!
Both are from Shanghai, one is a veteran in the field of criminal defense, the other is a great figure in the civil field. Zhang Minghua is very clear about the story of this colleague.
The criminal field has always been a hotbed for conflict. A certain lawyer might be violently assaulted by the victim's family right after defending a defendant. Or another lawyer might visit a victim's home seeking forgiveness, only to be violently assaulted by the victim's family...
There was even a case where a certain lawyer was beaten up by the victim’s family members who were present in court because of his successful defense...
Really, don't think too much about it. This is why many lawyers don't want to do criminal defense now, or even if they do, they only do it symbolically based on the circumstances.
If you successfully defend a criminal, it would be strange if he didn't beat the shit out of you...
This man surnamed Fang is an exception.
Because he is very good at fighting, whether in court, outside, or at other times, if someone fights with him, he will definitely not suffer any loss.
Not only that, those who beat him might even be detained...
Lawyer Fang was unaware of the lawyer's strange thoughts and simply began his own explanation.
"The defendant claims that we didn't use any other testing methods in our evidence testing, so we can't prove that these software can't be uninstalled. However, according to the most basic logical principles, we have tried every method a normal consumer could think of to uninstall the software, and if it still can't be uninstalled, then it should be considered impossible to uninstall!"
This chapter is not over yet, please click on the next page to continue reading!
Continue read on readnovelmtl.com