Rethinking the "fact-based" perception of "facts".
The cliché tells the truth about the law:
How to understand and comprehend the phrase "based on facts"?
Learn legal people, use legal people, all know this sentence.
This sentence seems too simplistic and prosaic.
However, this sentence is actually the sword of Shang Fang in the lawsuit, and it is no exaggeration to say that this sentence can be called the cornerstone of winning the lawsuit.
No matter the judge, no matter the lawyer, whoever deeply understands this sentence, who understands this sentence, who understands this sentence, the case handled will most likely be smooth, and the parties will never fall into unnecessary tossing and repetition.
At the beginning of my practice, when I did not understand the deep meaning of the law, I once smugly interpreted "based on facts" as "based on evidence", thinking that I had grasped the essence, paid special attention to the role of evidence, and raised the evidence to an incomprehensible level.
Brings improvement and convenience.
Recently, seeing an effective judgment made me have a new and deep understanding of this sentence:
Evidence is important, of course, if the interpretation of the evidence does not conform to the "facts".
Aside from the actual business process, interpret the "evidence".
They even try to construct "facts" with evidence
If the "facts" are completely contrary to the "facts", the "evidence" will be completely wrong, and the "evidence" will deviate from the "facts", and it will be difficult to win the trust of others and convince the adjudicators, and the result will naturally be that it is difficult to support the litigation claims.
In the face of the case, we need to be careful, humble, go deep into the front line, understand the actual operation process thoroughly, thoroughly understand the actual process, and then focus on the actual business operation process to collect evidence that can truly reflect the actual operation, and finally present the real facts, and the use and interpretation of the evidence can have credibility.
In the face of a case, do not take it for granted and make hasty judgments;
In the face of facts, it is necessary to have an in-depth understanding of the actual operation process;
In the face of evidence, we should not be self-righteous and detached from the interpretation of facts;
In the evidence collection stage, objective facts are the cause, evidence is the effect, evidence is based on facts, around facts to collect evidence, with facts as the basis for "evidence collection", the evidence obtained can reflect the truth of the facts as much as possible.
In the stage of cross-examination, evidence is the cause, legal facts are the effect, based on the facts, around the facts to interpret, with the facts as the basis of "cross-examination", the interpreted facts, in order to approach the credible truth of the facts.
Ignorance of objective facts and inability to obtain true evidence;
Detached from objective facts, it is difficult to credibility in interpreting evidence;
From objective facts, to legal facts;
Only one "truth" can win "faith".