Related articles:

• Taiwan authorities executed four murderers _ News _ new
• Xu Feng three generations without college students controver
• The station would the mainland tourism office to provide a l

's Court rejected the appeal, Xu Yunhe maintain the judgment of the first instance,moncler outlet. This means that the "good-hearted people," Xu Yunhe still a total of 108,606.34 yuan compensation for the loss of Wang Xiuzhi "Good people," Xu Yunhe readme the public opinion Xu Yunhe paste label. As a party not involved, we can not determine whether this triggered a huge controversy "collision" actually happened, but the public opinion, the collision left we could feel that the judicial crisis of credibility. Second instance upheld,hollister deutschland, can play a positive role it turn things around I'm not sure,isabel marant sneakers. From the report quoted the second trial referee, reasoning more fully compared to the first instance verdict, the facts and evidence logically associated more closely. Such, the evidence of the identification of the conclusions of the forensic center, the scene of the accident diagram, photographs, records of inquests, above, said the parties can form a complete chain of evidence sufficient to establish Wang Xiuzhi leg Xu Yunhe driving behavior caused Xu Yunhe driving behavior and Wang Xiuzhi The causal relationship between the damage. Xu Yunhe proposition and Wang Xiuzhi own falls,abercrombie, he is parking assistance untenable,hollister. "but in the first instance verdict, not riddled with many flaws. For example,hollister, the first instance judge found that can not determine the defendant's car and Wang Xiuzhi body contact, also can not be ruled out that there is no contact. But the judge has gone beyond plaintiff petitioned reason, plays a game of reasoning,abercrombie deutschland. The verdict is assumed that Mrs. Wang fell to the ground by the impact of the defendant to the car, and thus determine the personal injury compensation. This Mrs,hollister uk. Wang is to drive "intimidated" said the plaintiff, the defendants denied. Judgment based on the inference that neither recognized, how can he not be questioned So, not so much the second instance to maintain the original verdict, rather than the second trial based on new evidence and reason,hollister, to make a new judgment. At least in respect to the facts and evidence in the reasoning of the full extent of the second trial compared to the first instance, a refreshing change. The or This leads to an old issue: how shall reasoning. Especially for the verdict is concerned, it is the judge by the evidence of cross-examination,abercrombie paris, and certification to facts of the case, in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations made by the entity referee carrier. Reasoning, the judge can clearly show the process of deductive logic and its evaluation of evidence of the case, so that the parties feel their demands have been judges be taken seriously, so that people see national jurisdiction in the range of legal and rational use,hollister. Only sufficient reasoning to jurisdiction rational dialogue "overpower" from the command-shift to "convince" the administration of justice to obtain legitimacy,abercrombie. With the administration of justice, the public opinion, the hustle and bustle of natural attributed to quell.