Regarding the Chengdu Metro ** case, the court's judgment has indeed aroused widespread attention and discussion in the society. Being mistaken for ** behavior in public is undoubtedly a great distress and harm for the parties. From this point of view, Mr. Ho's appeal is understandable.
However, we must also note that the court's decision is not unreasonable. The court judged the case from a legal point of view on the basis of the laws of our country. According to the laws of China, certain conditions need to be met to constitute an infringement, for example, the actor needs to have the intention or negligence of the infringement, and the infringed party needs to have actual losses. In this case, the court may have held that the conduct of the two women did not meet these conditions.
There are some discrepancies between the reasons for the court's decision and what the Internet appealed at the time. Mr. Ho said that one of the women apologized only after being reminded by the police, and the court notice took the initiative to bow and apologizeWhen Mr. He was questioned by two women about the existence of "** behavior, he was asked to stand against the wall, take off a shoe and a sock, and put his hands behind his back, and when he adjusted his standing posture, the two girls sneered at him, and the court notice was to take off his shoes and socks by himself, and the stationmaster on duty informed He Moumou that the Chengdu Metro Operating Company had no right to inspect, and called the police at the request of He Moumou. At about 23:05, the police arrived at the platform of Jincheng Square Station. During this time, there was no physical contact between the parties.
At present, there are discrepancies between the parties and the court, and the truth may not be particularly clear, but the court's judgment is not very agreeable with personally. First of all, Mr. He was "misunderstood", and there was an argument in a public place such as the subway, and he also alarmed the subway security. It shows that this misunderstanding has been noticed by others. Being "framed" by someone, or in public, this feeling is definitely uncomfortable. In order to prove his "innocence", he took the initiative to take off his shoes to prove himself and eliminate everyone's misunderstanding of him. Although there were fewer people at that time, the impact was not great, but the adverse effect of making others mistakenly think that Mr. He was a ** objectively existed.
The two women mistook Mr. He's shoes for **, and it was no problem to say that it was reasonable, but the handling was improper, and the other party took off his shoes to prove himself. Later, under the witness of the subway security guard, the stationmaster, and the two women, Mr. He took off his shoes again to testify himself. To a certain extent, it has affected Mr. He's normal travel and delayed time.
For the two women, there is only ** reprimand, and there are no further measures. I think a formal apology to Mr. Ho is necessary.
Misunderstanding"A mouth, with impunity, for mistakes"0"Cost is not a good thing for society.