On March 2, The Paper learned from Jiang Ge's mother, Jiang Qiulian, that she recently received the "Notice of Complaint Investigation Result" and "Punishment Decision" from the Beijing Lawyers Association, which showed that Liu Nuanxi (former name: Liu Xin)** lawyer Hu Guiyun had violated the rules in handling the "Jiang Qiulian v. Liu Nuanxi Right to Life Dispute Case" (hereinafter referred to as the "Jiang Ge Case"), and was given a disciplinary punishment of public condemnation.
Jiang Qiulian complained to lawyer Liu Nuanxi for hyping up the case
On November 3, 2016, Jiang Qiulian's only daughter Jiang Ge was killed by Liu Nuanxi's ex-boyfriend Chen Shifeng in Tokyo, Japan. After that, Jiang Qiulian and Liu Nuanxi had a dispute over the cause of Jiang Ge's death, and Jiang Qiulian filed a lawsuit with the court.
On January 10, 2022, the Chengyang District People's Court of Qingdao City, Shandong Province, made a first-instance judgment in the case of a dispute over the right to life between plaintiff Jiang Qiulian and defendant Liu Nuanxi: defendant Liu Nuanxi shall compensate plaintiff Jiang Qiulian for various economic losses of 496,000 yuan and solatium for mental damages of 200,000 yuan within 10 days of the effective date of the judgment, and bear all case acceptance fees.
On December 30 of the same year, the Intermediate People's Court of Qingdao City, Shandong Province, made a second-instance judgment in the case of a dispute over the right to life between Jiang Qiulian and Liu Nuanxi (formerly known as Liu Xin): rejecting Liu Nuanxi's appeal and upholding the original judgment.
According to the Punishment Decision issued by the Beijing Lawyers Association on February 29, 2024, on July 11, 2022, the complainant Jiang Qiulian filed a complaint with the Beijing Lawyers Association (hereinafter referred to as the "Beijing Lawyers Association") and the Beijing Haidian District Bureau of Justice against lawyer Hu Guiyun of Beijing Antong Law Firm (hereinafter referred to as Antong Law Firm) on the grounds of illegal disclosure of case facts, hyping up the case, and affecting the normal trial of the case.
Jiang Qiulian alleged that lawyer Hu Guiyun served as the defendant Liu Nuanxi's lawyer in the case of Jiang Qiulian v. Liu Nuanxi's right to life dispute. After the first-instance verdict of the case was announced, Liu Nuanxi lost the case. During the second-instance trial, Hu Guiyun and his client Liu Nuanxi used the Internet to hype up a series of malicious attacks on Jiang Qiulian and the deceased Jiang Ge, and provoked thousands of supporters to attack the Qingdao Intermediate People's Court and Jiang Qiulian's ** lawyer on the Internet, in an attempt to mislead the public to question judicial injustice, with the intention of influencing the outcome of the second-instance verdict. Hu Guiyun also illegally collected Jiang Qiulian's personal private information, and his actions not only caused great mental harm to Jiang Qiulian, but also seriously damaged the reputation of the judicial organs and the normal social order.
Jiang Qiulian requested that Hu Guiyun's violations of the Lawyers Law and lawyers' practice norms be investigated, and that he be given the revocation of his lawyer's practice certificate or other disciplinary sanctions.
The Punishment Decision also contains Hu Guiyun's relevant opinions. Hu Guiyun believes that in the ** Jiang Qiulian v. Liu Nuanxi right to life dispute case, his own Weibo account "Hu Guiyun Lawyer" has never had any malicious attacks on Jiang Qiulian and the deceased Jiang Ge to insult and slander, let alone solicit thousands of supporters to besiege the Qingdao Intermediate People's Court and Jiang Qiulian's ** lawyer on the Internet.
Hu Guiyun believes that according to the law of the development of things, Jiang Qiulian and Huang Leping will inevitably gain support and opposition while publishing their own ideas on the Internet, and Jiang Qiulian blames him for the controversy and refutation caused by Jiang Qiulian and Huang Leping's words and deeds. He has never illegally collected Jiang Qiulian's personal privacy information.
According to the Punishment Decision, on July 25, 2022, the Haidian Lawyers Association filed a case for investigation and added Antong as the person under investigation. Antong and lawyer Hu Guiyun submitted written defenses and relevant evidence materials on the content of the complaint. On July 19, 2023, the Haidian Lawyers Association submitted the preliminary review opinions of the case to the Beijing Lawyers Association. On October 23, 2023, the Beijing Lawyers Association held a hearing on this case. Now the case has been reviewed.
The Lawyers Association found that the lawyer constituted a case of illegal speculation
The Beijing Lawyers Association believes that as far as this complaint is concerned, whether lawyer Hu Guiyun constitutes an illegal speculation case depends on whether lawyer Hu Guiyun has repeatedly and continuously published, commented on inaccurate, non-comprehensive, exaggerated, misleading, false or speculative information (hereinafter referred to as false information) for the purpose of expanding his influence on society, resulting in further confrontation between the parties to the case and social sentiments, contributing to the social spread of false information and expanding the social influence of false information. Based on the above criteria, the Beijing Lawyers Association believes that lawyer Hu Guiyun is subjectively at fault for supporting the illegal hype of the case, and objectively carries out the illegal hype of the case.
On January 24, 2022, a Weibo user posted a comment under lawyer Hu Guiyun's Weibo: "In the past, everyone believed in the law, and there was no hype. Now everyone may be able to unite and post what Jiang has done to Liu every day in the past five years. Many melon-eating netizens in the province don't understand anything, and they come to scold just by looking at the title. Lawyer Hu Guiyun replied under this Weibo comment: "This suggestion is very good and very important! ”
The Beijing Lawyers Association believes that lawyer Hu Guiyun, as a professional legal worker, failed to prompt and correct the above-mentioned limitations of the proposal when supporting the netizen's suggestion, and allowed and encouraged the emotional confrontation between netizens who supported Liu and netizens who supported Jiang. Based on this, the Association believes that lawyer Hu Guiyun was subjectively at fault in supporting the hype of the case.
When rumors appeared on the Internet that Jiang Ge lied that Liu Nuanxi was pregnant and asked Chen Shifeng for 100,000 yen, and whether the object of Chen Shifeng's deliberate plot was Jiang Ge, on February 19, 2022, lawyer Hu Guiyun** others posted a similar rumor on Weibo and commented: "In the past few days, several people have pushed me a ** report of 100,000 yen, and they have taken the trouble to talk about 100,000 yen!" ”
The Beijing Lawyers Association believes that lawyer Hu Guiyun** and commented on the relevant rumors, which objectively led to the false information related to the case, misled readers' curiosity and concern, promoted the further dissemination of such false information, and expanded the social influence of such false information. Lawyer Hu Guiyun's conduct constituted a violation of the hype case.
When rumors of Jiang Qiulian raising money and scamming money appeared on the Internet, on February 20, 2022, lawyer Hu Guiyun ** Weibo: "Appeal: All those who have donated money to Jiang Moulian, no matter. Still is. Even. Call the Jimo Public Security Bureau**0532-110 or 0532-88512061 to report to the police and sue Jiang Moulian for fraud ......And commented: "Netizens consciously or unconsciously began to learn and use the law, and strive to maintain social fairness and justice!" ”
The Beijing Lawyers Association believes that although lawyer Hu Guiyun did not directly claim that Jiang Qiulian had cheated on donations, his comments in support of encouraging netizens to report to the police without verifying whether Jiang Qiulian had indeed cheated on donations objectively led to the curiosity and concern of readers about the false information related to the parties to the case, which contributed to the further dissemination of such false information and expanded the social influence of such false information. Lawyer Hu Guiyun's conduct constituted a violation of the hype case.
When rumors and negative comments about Jiang Qiulian's marital status appeared on the Internet, on February 25, 2022, lawyer Hu Guiyun posted on Weibo, with the content: "35,000 people entered the live broadcast room, and the men involved in the fourth marriage are so innocent, especially the rich village secretary surnamed Wang, and the son of unknown origin."
The Beijing Lawyers Association believes that although lawyer Hu Guiyun deleted the Weibo on his own two hours after it was posted, it objectively contributed to the wider dissemination of false information that was unfavorable to the parties to the case, expanded the social influence of such false information, further aroused the curiosity and attention of netizens and readers, and stimulated or enhanced readers' negative evaluation of Jiang Qiulian. Lawyer Hu Guiyun's conduct constituted a violation of the hype case.
When rumors appeared on the Internet that Jiang Qiu Lotus money bought a water army to hype up the case, on March 6, 2022, lawyer Hu Guiyun ** others Weibo and commented, "Jiang Ge's case has been searched more than 300 times in five years, and it has to cost tens of millions of yuan, this is going to be blocked, does the platform agree?" ”
The Beijing Lawyers Association believes that although lawyer Hu Guiyun did not directly identify or claim that Jiang Qiulian used money to buy the water army, without verifying the authenticity of the rumors, the content of the comment strongly implied that he personally approved of such rumors, which objectively contributed to the spread of false information, expanded the social influence of such false information, and prompted readers to make negative comments about Jiang Qiulian.
To sum up, the Beijing Lawyers Association believes that lawyer Hu Guiyun is subjectively at fault for supporting the hype of the case, and objectively has repeatedly carried out the behavior of self-publishing, ** and positive comments on false information, which continues to promote the wider dissemination of such information, expands the social influence of such information, further arouses the curiosity and attention of netizens and readers, and stimulates or enhances readers' negative evaluation of the parties to the case.
The lawyer was given a public reprimand, and the law firm was given a warning
The Beijing Lawyers Association stated that lawyer Hu Guiyun constituted a case of illegal speculation and should be subject to disciplinary sanctions in accordance with article 45 of the "Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Rules for the Punishment of Violations by Members of the Beijing Lawyers Association (Provisional)".
The Beijing Lawyers Association also noted that lawyer Hu Guiyun had also published a Weibo comment that "when we don't know the full picture of the matter, we should not rashly comment on one person, such remarks may become a snowflake that overwhelms another person", and also posted a Weibo referencing Article 40 of the "Measures for the Administration of Lawyers' Practice" that lawyers' public remarks on cases should be lawful, objective, fair, and prudent ......The relevant practice norms must not be used to distort the truth or clearly violate social order and good customs, and must not maliciously slander others. However, when negative rumors about Jiang Qiulian appeared on the Internet, lawyer Hu Guiyun not only did not verify and clarify the rumors, but instead spread these rumors and gave a positive evaluation of these rumors.
Regarding Jiang Qiulian's complaint that lawyer Hu Guiyun "insulted and slandered the opposing party and privately investigated the privacy of the opposing party", the Beijing Lawyers Association held that lawyer Hu Guiyun violated the privacy of the opposing party and derogated the social image of the opposing party by disclosing false or misleading information, which constituted a violation of the rules and belonged to the constitutive circumstances of the illegal hype case.
The Beijing Lawyers Association also pointed out that the Antong Law Firm, where lawyer Hu Guiyun works, neither discovered nor believed that Hu Guiyun's self-published and commented on certain remarks on Weibo constituted illegal hype cases, let alone corrected Hu Guiyun's violations in a timely manner, and Antong should bear the corresponding responsibility for negligent management. In accordance with the provisions of Article 39 of the Rules on Punishment of Violations by Members of the Lawyers Association (for Trial Implementation), the Commission imposed corresponding disciplinary sanctions on Antong.
To sum up, it is decided that: 1. give lawyer Hu Guiyun a disciplinary punishment for public reprimand; 2. Give Beijing Antong Law Firm a warning for disciplinary punishment in the industry.
In accordance with the procedures, where a member who has received a sanction from the lawyers association is dissatisfied with the sanction decision, he or she shall submit a written application for review to the special working committee for the punishment review of the lawyers association within 15 working days of the delivery of the sanction decision, and submit two copies of the application for review.
*: The Paper.