Xu Yunhe didn't know until after the accident? Peng Yu? Use this name. But in the eyes of most netizens, his experience quickly reminded people of the young man in Nanjing.
Four years ago, when Peng Yu got off the bus, she met Mrs. Xu who fell to the ground. He said he helped the old man up, and the old man said he was knocked to the ground. As a result, the court awarded Peng Yu compensation of more than 40,000 yuan. The case was settled in the second instance, but the specific content was not disclosed.
In the view of He Bing, deputy dean of the Law School of China University of Political Science and Law? Peng Yu case? Is it a kind of? Tombstone? The verdict sent a terrible signal? The principle that the plaintiff bears the burden of proof can be vague. What does this precedent mean when neither side has conclusive evidence? Without a witness to prove that I didn't hit it, even if I hit it? . ? Peng Yu case? After the accident, in Nanjing alone, many old people fell to the ground and no one dared to come forward to help. Some people sigh, Peng Yu case? After that? Social morality has declined for 30 years? . On the Weibo, Xu Yunhe was defined by netizens as? Tianjin version of Peng Yu? . ? Peng Yu case? When it happened, Ji Weidong wrote an article pointing out the absurdity in the first-instance judgment. In the first-instance judgment of Xu Yunhe case, he also saw a similar paradox that the principle of shadow fairness is unfair? .
In Ji Weidong's view, the controversial judgment may come from the principle of fairness stipulated in the General Principles of Civil Law, such as Article 132: If the parties are not at fault for causing damage, they may share civil liability according to the actual situation.
This party has to bear all the damage in order to prevent the victim from proving the fault of the other party? The law of blood? , but in fact? Cold-blooded judgment Even citizens who are not at fault for infringement may be ordered to bear the liability for damages, even including good people who are courageous.
What makes Ji Weidong even more incredible is the huge omission of the evidence system. ? Who is in charge, not whose voice is loud, should be identified and judged by scientific functional departments. Whether the old lady was knocked down by a car or fell down by herself should be judged by medical appraisal. Including the part of the car collision, whether the paint bumps can be aligned and identified. ?
However, Zhang Yinlong, a doctor questioned by Hongqiao Court, said: I can't judge this. It should be identified by a forensic doctor. ?
According to Wang Liping, eight days after her mother's accident, a policeman called to identify the traces of the trousers worn by the old lady that day, and she told her that the trousers had been washed. ? Then don't take it. ? That's what I said on the phone.
These loopholes are like a huge net on the Internet. Rashomon? Buried one trap after another.
? When the judiciary loses its authority, everyone can only look for relative objectivity in public opinion. Finally, it became a subjective and subjective contest. ? Ji Weidong said that the imperfection of the system has turned this issue into a chilling ethical issue? When a person is unable to take responsibility, it may be necessary to find someone to take responsibility. Of course, it's still scary to talk about this. ?
Everyone regards everyone as an untrustworthy enemy.
However, just as everyone pointed the finger at the absurdity of precedent, another voice appeared on the Internet: If Xu Yunhe hit someone, but because of insufficient evidence, then he can say that he stopped to save people. So, will those traffic accidents that escaped the surveillance cameras do the same thing in the future? We have no prejudice against anyone, but there must be people lying on both sides, even lying. No matter who lies, it's freezing. Under the current social situation, this situation is not impossible. ? Ji Weidong said frankly.
Actually as early as? Peng Yu case? When it happened, some media interpreted it from an ethical point of view: economics, which has been dominant in public space since 1990, popularized the theoretical assumption that individuals pursue maximum interests as an ethical discipline. All these causes and effects pushed China into the abyss of ethical blank. People have returned to what philosophers call the natural state: everyone regards everyone as an untrustworthy enemy, and dealing with others has become a common anxiety and fear.
Ji Weidong quoted British historian Eric? Hobsbawm's theory explains this phenomenon: when people lack trust in the social contract, they will return? A war of ten thousand people against ten thousand people? State, in this rather unsafe environment, they bite each other and even devour each other.
In Ji Weidong's view, what is this phenomenon? Xu Yunhe? This is obvious in this case. ? When social norms and legal norms can't play a role, public opinion begins to play a normative role. ?
A week before the trial of the second instance, Xu Yunhe wrote a post entitled "Helping others, wrongly sentenced to190,000 yuan, the court arbitrarily sentenced the gourd case, where to go for the grievances", which was posted on the Tianjin Automobile Forum. One is called? Zheng Dashan? Some netizens transferred to Weibo to add? Public opinion assistance? Four words. Soon, this Weibo hit rate exceeded five figures.
Just when this Weibo was madly reprinted, Wang Xiuzhi's family didn't know what had happened in the online world. Until the classmate's daughter said to Wang Liping:? Aunt, look, maybe grandma made a big deal. ?
Subsequently, Wang Liping's niece registered? The truth 009? Weibo, and released the photos obtained from the traffic brigade.
Some netizens sent out such feelings:? If you don't believe in the law and the people, what else can you believe? ?
? What we are most worried about now is the liquefaction of China society, and the whole society is running water. Without an accurate institutional framework and behavioral standards, you say yours and I say mine, which is a chaotic game. ? Ji Weidong said. (According to China Youth Daily)