What other cases are similar to Peng Yu s case in recent years?

First, the Nanjing Peng Yu case, as well as several similar cases that occurred later, the Wan Xin case in Chongqing, the Peng Yu case in Nanjing, and the Li Kaiqiang case in Zhengzhou, did indeed play a negative role in social morality to a certain extent.

On December 15, 2010, Xiao Yusheng, a veteran cadre in Shenzhen, fell in the community, and no one stepped forward to help him, and died more than 20 minutes later. The security guard said that it was not indifference, and he was afraid of taking responsibility. Many people in the post mentioned that they were greatly affected by Peng Yu's case, and they were afraid that their kindness would not be rewarded!

The case is costing the whole of society dearly, and everyone can be a victim!

Second, there are indeed unhealthy tendencies in the current social atmosphere. "Good people are not rewarded", "bad people are rampant", speculators benefit, and those who help others "shed blood and tears". College students saved people and sacrificed themselves bravely, but they were ...... by unscrupulous corpse diggers who "demanded a price for corpses".The extremely unhealthy specimens of reality are full of estrangement and indifference between people.

The third is that "helping the needy" and righteousness and courage have become scarce commodities, and the corresponding appearance is the decline of morality, and the deep-seated reason is the rupture of social trust bonds caused by the weak rational power of citizens' contracts.

If the moral bottom line is gone, it is indeed a chilling thing.

I can't give it to you here, it's too much, so much that I don't know what to say, not to mention anything else, Xu Yunhe is definitely Peng Yu's second.

At 9:00 a.m. on October 20, 2006, Mrs. Xu was waiting for the bus at a bus stop when she accidentally fell and broke a bone. It has been identified as a grade 8 disability by a professional department, and tens of thousands of yuan in medical expenses are required.

Mrs. Xu identified Peng Yu, the first young man to get off the bus, who knocked herself down and injured herself.

Peng Yu recalled that three buses entered the same platform at the same time that morning, and Mrs. Xu had to catch the third bus at the back of the line, and she happened to be from the second bus. As soon as he got out of the car, he saw Mrs. Xu fall to the ground, so he hurriedly went up to help her up, and after a while, another middle-aged man also saw this scene and took the initiative to help, and then the two of them sent Mrs. Xu to the hospital together. Unexpectedly, Mrs. Xu would insist that she knocked him down.

After being sent to the hospital, Peng Yu also lent money to Mrs. Xu for medical treatment, and Mrs. Xu's family rushed to the hospital and was not thanked by Mrs. Xu's family, because Mrs. Xu insisted that Peng Yu was injured when she knocked herself down, and also asked Peng Yu to bear more than 130,000 yuan in hospitalization and compensation costs.

After this incident, it caused a huge repercussion in the society, because the area where the incident occurred belonged to the blind spot of monitoring, and there were suddenly no eyewitnesses to the incident, which made the investigation of the case more difficult. Most of the netizens who saw this news said that they would not dare to reach out to help people in the future, there is no trust between people at all, and they were originally kind but were bitten back, which is a very chilling thing.

Afterwards, Mrs. Xu took Peng Yu, who kindly helped him, to court, and after the court sentenced Peng Yu to pay more than 40,000 yuan to Mrs. Xu, Peng Yu was in tears after hearing the verdict, he said that he was falsely accused of doing good deeds and said that he would insist on appealing.

It was not until March 2008 that the case was mediated by the court in the second instance that Peng Yu and Mrs. Xu's family reached a settlement. Although a long time has passed, there are thought-provoking pain points behind this incident.

On the morning of November 20, 2006, an old lady was knocked down and fell into a fracture while catching a bus at the bus stop in Xishuimen Square in Nanjing.

It was because he saw an old man fall to the ground, out of concern for the old man, so he went to help the old man up and sent the old man to the hospital with others, but the old man's family bit back, saying that he pushed it down.

The truth of Peng Yu's case ten years ago is that the old man Xu Shoulan did collide with Peng Yuqi.

In the end, the parties reached a settlement agreement during the second trial, and the case was closed with a settlement and withdrawal, and after the settlement and withdrawal, Peng Yu also said that Xu Shoulan did collide with Xu Shoulan in the accident that occurred in November 2006.

In the future, if you see an old man falling. Should it be helped? Gotta think about it.

The reason why the judgment in this case is problematic is that it did not follow the provisions of the Rules of Evidence in Civil Procedure, and there were two fatal errors. First of all, according to Article 1 of the Rules, the plaintiff in this case bears the burden of proof, and it should be pointed out that this case does not comply with the provisions of Article 4 of the Rules, and there is no situation in which the defendant presents evidence, so the defendant in this case does not bear the burden of proof.

Secondly, in addition to the statements of the parties, the plaintiff's evidence is the record of the local police station, but the form of the record is illegal, and according to Article 10 of the Rules of Evidence, the original should be submitted, but the document is not the original, but an electronic file, so it does not have independent evidentiary force, and at the same time, the electronic document was recorded by the plaintiff's son's mobile phone, and according to Article 69, Paragraph 2 of the Rules of Evidence, because the provider of the evidence has an interest in the parties to the case, it does not have independent evidentiary force. It cannot be used alone as a basis for determining facts. As a result, the plaintiff lacked sufficient evidence to support its claim. Clause.

3. The judgment is also aware of this problem, so in the judgment, the determination of facts is based on "common sense", and according to the provisions of Article 9, paragraph 3 of the Rules of Evidence, the court can indeed make a judgment on the facts of the case based on "daily life experience", but in this case, the "common sense" of the judge's judgment does not conform to the scope of "daily life experience", resulting in the final judgment lacking sufficient factual basis. This is the biggest issue in the judgment of this case. Fourth, and the second issue in the judgment of this case, this case is a general tort case, and the principle of "fault liability" should be applied, that is, the plaintiff needs to prove that the defendant is at fault before the defendant can be held liable, but the judge realizes that the factual basis for his determination of legal liability is insufficient, so he adopts the principle of "fairness" to require the defendant to bear responsibility, but not all cases can apply the principle of fairness, and the application of this principle in the court's judgment further shows that the evidence for the factual determination of the defendant's responsibility is insufficient.

However, the judge did not strictly follow the law, but blindly pursued harmony, which eventually led to the tragedy of this society.

Xia Xueluan, a professor at the Department of Sociology at Peking University, believes that this phenomenon shows that there is a crisis of trust in society, and that the verdict of the "Peng Yu case" in Nanjing has produced such a social effect. On September 3, 2007, the Nanjing Gulou District People's Court issued a first-instance judgment in which the court held that if Peng Yu had done good deeds in the face of righteousness and courage, he should have caught the person who knocked down Mrs. Xu, not just helped her. And "according to social reason", Peng Yu should explain the facts to Mrs. Xu's family, and then leave on her own, instead of sending her to the hospital with her family.

The court held that Peng Yu's actions were "obviously contrary to reason", so it found that Peng Yu had knocked down the old man, and "did not accept" Peng Yu's claim of righteousness and courage. According to the court's reasoning, Peng Yu's act of sending Mrs. Xu to the hospital was purely a thief. Some people say that the court's first-instance verdict has set social morality back by 30 years, and Xia Xueluan agrees.

There is already a crisis of trust in society, and this verdict hastened the moral regression. This is the brutality of the system to justice, and it has had an exemplary effect. See next ** for details.

Once there was an old man on our side who fell on the side of the road, and then I walked with my girlfriend, and then my girlfriend and I didn't see it, and left,,, the old man fell in front of me all of a sudden, it was scary, and the reason why we didn't help was that we were afraid of being blackmailed, after all, our family is not very rich, and more is better than less.

Let China's moral level go back by 30 years.

It causes a regression in the moral level of social groups.

This kind of "death or death" seems to be understood by most people. Many people cite Nanjing's "Peng Yu case" as an example: Peng Yu did a good deed and suffered a lawsuit and lost money.

Therefore, good deeds should be carefully considered. Peng Yu should not say that he "did a good deed" and ate the lawsuit, the original intention of the law must be to promote good and punish evil. In Peng Yu's case, the judge of the first instance held that "from the analysis of common sense, the possibility of Peng Yu and the old lady colliding is relatively high", but neither party was at fault, and required Peng Yu to bear 40% of the responsibility according to the "principle of fairness".

The two parties settled in the second instance, and Peng Yu assumed 10% of the responsibility and paid 10,000 yuan to close the case. Whether Peng Yu bumped into the old lady or not, only they know. But the problem in this case lies in the judge's determination of the facts!

There is no evidence to prove it, and relying on and unreasonable "common sense analysis" to determine the facts chills everyone's hearts. The determination of facts should be based on evidence, and if the court failed to do this, it should be said that the judgment is problematic. This case could have been corrected by a higher court, but for the sake of "saving face", the courts at all levels chose to "do the work" for the parties to mediate, and kept the mediation results confidential, thus losing the opportunity to explain to the society the original intention of the law to promote good and punish evil!

It has caused a misunderstanding in the society that the law stipulates this, which has caused a very bad impact. ** Played a role in the Peng Yu case. But this fueling was played a very bad role by misdirection.

In order to catch the eye, ** suppose Peng Yu is a good person and eats a lawsuit, so as to directly derive "good people are not rewarded"! What if Peng Yu really knocked down the old lady? This situation is not ** to consider.

Most of the ** are not interested in the facts of the case, nor do they analyze it from a professional point of view, but just blindly cater to the psychology of the public. There are a large number of cases of "seeing death and not saving" in society, is there no responsibility?! However, I don't think any of this is a reason for us to "die or die" now.

The real reason is that in reality there is a problem in our system: the loss of abiding by the rules, and the benefit of breaking the rules! From this and the other, everyone has to weigh the risks of being a good person, so they choose to "sit on the sidelines".

Not a word about the classic quotation at the time, "If you didn't hit it, why should you help" this is the culprit, there is no wind and no waves, crime is contempt for the law, like polluting the flow of water, and a wrong judgment is a denial of the law, like polluting the water source.

It is no longer important whether Mr. Peng hit someone or not, what matters is the sentences in the judgment that "judge by common sense" and "both parties are not at fault, and Mr. Peng will compensate 40% according to the principle of fairness". Everyone knows the truth of "there is no doubt about the guilt", this judgment in the absence of sufficient evidence, according to common sense, found that Mr. Peng hit someone, and later said that the two parties were not at fault, since it is right, why should Mr. Peng compensate?

Peng Yu did hit the old lady, this is what he said personally after the case, the old lady was bedridden for three years due to a fracture, but Peng Yu shirked the responsibility by doing Lei Feng's good deeds at that time, where is your conscience?

Is Peng Yu an armored warrior? Can you touch people on the road?

Abstract Peng Yuhe caused such a big impact mainly because the negative effects of the "Peng Yu case" were unexpected by many of the parties involved. As political and legal departments, they should take this as a warning, deeply reflect on and draw lessons, strive to improve the level of judicial case-handling, and create a good social and moral environment.

First of all, it is necessary to attach great importance to the issue of the professionalism of the case-handling personnel reflected in the "Peng Yu case" and earnestly strengthen the professionalization of the political and legal contingent.

Hello, Peng Yuhe caused such a big impact mainly because the negative effects of the "Peng Yu case" were unexpected by many of the parties involved. As political and legal departments, they should take this as a warning, deeply reflect on and draw lessons, strive to improve the level of judicial case-handling, and create a good social and moral environment.

First of all, it is necessary to attach great importance to the issue of the professionalism of the case-handling personnel reflected in the "Peng Yu case" and earnestly strengthen the professionalization of the political and legal contingent.