Evidence is very important in criminal litigation. Our lawyers regard evidence as the significant skill while dealing with the case and discriminates all the evidence with objectivity, relevancy and validity.

　　Criminal cases always happen somewhere and sometime, moreover it will leave behind some hints relating with the case such as imprint, relic and etc., yet the party or witness is likely to forget them; otherwise, they consider something unrelated as evidence. As a criminal counsel, in the face of mixed materials provided by the prosecutor, he should not only collect and bring forward evidence to seek the truth of accusation, but also discover the deficiency as well.

　　There was one appeal case we dealt with about the crime of smuggling common goods and articles committed by an American citizen Mr. Gao. We found that although the evidence was clear and valid, the People’s Court (of first instance) missed an important detail-Mr.Gao has American nationality. He lived overseas for several years and knew almost nothing about criminal law of China. Mr. Gao didn’t have subjective and malignant intention. We quoted to the People’s Court (of second instance) with his American passport and the stipulation of light punishment for the crime of smuggling, appealing for gentle verdict.  

　　This defense opinion was attracted importance by the court’s(of second instance). Chinese Criminal Law should be applicable to Mr. Gao who commits a crime in China, despite great extent for measurement of punishment; at last, the court accepted our opinion. The judge thought the punishment of first instance was inappropriately and meted out fixed-term imprisonment of five years instead of eight years.

　　The first judgment of the People’s Court of Xishan District, Wuxi, Jiangsu Province: Mr. Wu committed the crime of taking advantage of one’s office to illegally take possession of property of one’s unit, crime of misappropriation of public funds, crime of intentionally destroying accounting books; he was executed the fixed-term imprisonment of ten years. Mr. Chen, a Tanwanese entrusted us as Wu’s defense lawyer in the second instance.

　　We found that, in all the materials, there was nothing to prove the crime but two pieces of testimony by whom related with the case. Even the public prosecutor can’t identify the possession amount and the chain of evidence was intermitted. We proposed the opinion that“the existing evidence cannot be recognized”and it was accepted by the court; the item of accusation was rejected finally.

　　The same mistake was made on the indictment of misappropriating one million RMB - only one testimony of witness. This kind of evidence is called“one and only evidence”. At the same time, we applied to investigate the account of the corporation. The result came out that the company did not lack one million RMB. The item of indictment was also rejected by the court.

　　About the crime of intentionally destroying accounting books, the prosecutor only provided the picture of Mr. Wu’s doghouse and explained that it was where Wu destroying the evidence. We identified carefully that there was no paper ash in the doghouse and no imprint after fire on the wall; so we indicate that there was no relationship between the picture and the indictment. The court accepted our defense opinion: the charge was not reliable, eventually, Mr. Wu was sentenced to the fixed-term imprisonment of four years.

　　Evidence determines litigation, which is same as the name of the book written by Lawyer Li Xiaohua: Let Evidence Speak!