At present, there are still some confusion for lawyers in the process of criminal cases, most of which is the old problem, there are also some new problems. I think the perspective and analysis of these puzzles, explore the law itself and the lawyer management departments should be how to solve these problems, but also should pay attention to what the problem.

A lawyer, met and investigation to practice in strict accordance with the law, guard against risk.

 At present the law in handling criminal cases, meet the difficult problem is still very prominent, in major cases of this problem is more prominent. For example, meet the case still more, some delay the meeting time, some limited meeting time, times, and some are limiting conversation, there's simply not allowed to meet with. In the new criminal procedure law for several years later, these problems are still not solved, it is a grim reality. Faced with this situation, lawyers at present basically incapable of action, only the usual practice is to argue, to the bar, to the judicial administrative organ, including to reflect the situation of public security three organs, but these effects are very limited.

 Present at the meeting were illegal monitoring a common phenomenon, and even some in the meeting room wall clearly posted a notice on: "everything you do or say in the camera, please to meet." This time I met with Liu Yong in Tieling, is to do so, as in secretly recorded is not uncommon. In view of this situation, the lawyers, one should argue, on the other hand, is more cautious. In this case, I also in some related meeting, the Ministry of public security, high are more important, but in fact many places did not solve. It seems that the solution to these problems should have a process, but, in the solution before we can't stop. This requires our lawyers to be more careful in the meeting, to strictly grasp the sense of propriety, can not have more contents and ways in violation of the law. Here, I want to ask a question: how to correctly handle the relationship between lawyers and defendants and the defendant's family? How to grasp the relationship between? This is a very important problem we should pay attention to. In practice, after the lawyer entrusted mentality is not the same, there are two kinds of extreme conditions of note: some lawyers is be petrified, irresponsible, this attitude is obviously wrong; while some lawyers emotional color is too strong, this attitude also easy problems. For example, when lawyers met a grievance obvious cases, sometimes the special input, in this case, some people will be out of a good wishes and forget to grasp the sense of propriety, may in the family or the defendant's repeated requests to make some special behavior. This attitude is understandable, but the compassion instead of legal practice is not desirable, can not forget their own lawyers and standard practice in any case. 

 A typical example: a lawyer for a death penalty two cases, family members asked him there is no way to save lives, he said, according to the case of no way, unless the defendant has performed meritorious service. Just the defendant's brother grasp a revealed clues, I wrote a note, the note to the defendant asked for a lawyer, he also does not agree, then stand request agreed. Then the defendant by the clue to write the disclosure materials, and can be verified, the court of second instance and commuted to death with reprieve. After the event, the procuratorial organs to ferret out the truth, the lawyer caught up, to cover up the crime prosecution. Then the case after three sessions, the procuratorate also appeal again, finally get an acquittal. Of course, the case pleaded not guilty for good reason, because the harbor crime refers to the "false proof shield", and not to pass note that. But this approach itself is a problem, if the defense strength is poor, it will probably be convicted. It is worth mentioning that, in this case is precisely the lawyer planted in the brother's head, because when the brother with his phone asking him to do this, he also recorded sound. I have always believed that a lawyer should be conscientious, dedicated to do case, this is no problem. But after all, lawyers and the parties is the relationship between clients and client, limits of this relationship must be sure, otherwise easy problems. This phenomenon is our lawyers not a mature performance. 

 During the meeting there is a more serious problem, is the last few years, in the trial stage and the second stage, the meeting is still the investigators or guards present. This situation should say is serious and typical, before the implementation of the new criminal procedure law has not happened. Importantly, these lawyers themselves cannot be solved, fundamentally resolved to rely on legislation. Prior to this, it can only rely on the judicial administrative organ and the bar association to communication and coordination, relying on the superior public security organs and procuratorial organs of the constraints and say. At present, the role of lawyers association is relatively weak, this is caused by the reason of history. But I think also believe that, this effect can be strengthened as soon as possible. The lawyer skirmish warfare situation if not promptly change, is not conducive to strengthening the management, at the same time, it is difficult to fundamentally improve the lawyer's status. 

 Lawyers in handling major cases, the investigation is very difficult, it is really difficult, especially the risk is too big. A lawyer investigation of evidence when facing obstacles I don't have to say, this is related to the idea of people, also with the criminal procedure law respondents have refused the right of lawyer. The National Lawyers Association in the formulation of "lawyers norms" criminal cases, the problem of risk prevention in the survey consider more carefully. In accordance with the law, there is no limit to the lawyer investigation, no provisions must be two personal investigation and evidence collection, because the law behavior is not authorized by the government behavior. But from the protection of law point of view, in the specification requirements preferably by the two people. I think in time for the important case, should adhere to the two person, or if there is a problem that is not clear, sometimes even two people, it is difficult to say clearly. At the same time, the investigation procedure should be strictly in accordance with the norms to. "A lawyer to handle criminal cases is normative" since the founding of new China Bar Association to develop the first internal self-discipline norms, the specification is a constraint on lawyers, is also the protection of lawyers. Procuratorial organs, public security organs attached great importance to this specification, they in some laws and regulations, our specification is compiled in, sometimes when they complain lawyer, also refer to the specification, this illustrates the importance of this specification. 

Two, criminal defense should adhere to the principle of evidence standard.

 According to the new mode of trial, now in handling criminal cases, the prior formation of defending opinions whole is not the reality, several ideas but the basic defense views or may form, shall be prepared in advance. So, how to form the defense point of view? The criminal defense should adhere to the principle of what? 

 I think, the most important is to should adhere to the principle of evidence standard. Turning to the evidence for the standard, it will inevitably involve issues in recent years our practitioners and theorists in the heated discussion about evidence truthfulness and objective truthfulness. Evidence is also called the legal truth, this problem a few years this argument very warm. Because of our past the evidence is not enough, research is also very weak, in this case, we have often stressed, is a very correct in theory, but in the application of the law is too vague and general principles is to seek truth from facts, the principle of. It must be pointed out that the principle of seek truth from facts, is undoubtedly correct, but the implementation of the principles, means and ways must be clear and feasible. In the past, we often use the principle of seek truth from facts to summarize all, but ignore the means and ways to realize this principle, which is the result of contempt law real, is due to too much emphasis on unrealistic objective facts and the authenticity of the lost evidence base, which leads to the determination of the objective reality of subjective. Seek truth from facts is the pursuit of a final result, but in real life, in the scientific and technological level constraints, some evidence can not be collected very complete and accurate, therefore, sometimes evidence truthfulness and objective truthfulness will conflict. For example, borrowed money without you, how to do? A written contract is lost, how to do? A murderous criminal cases without evidence, how to do? Sometimes, according to the analysis of all the signs, we can in the heart that this fact, but suffer from does not have evidence, then, in the law, how should be identified?

 There is a point of view, we are pursuing the real results, the final so, when we have doubts about the evidence, it can not merely to evidence, but should be evidence truthfulness and objective truthfulness together, seek truth from facts to draw an authentic conclusion. Another view was that, seek truth from facts point of view is not wrong, the pursuit of the final results is correct, however, when the evidence is true (or legal true) when conflict with this result, when the legal truth can not confirm the inferred the objective real results, it can only be to the statutory evidence criteria. That is to say, when the evidence is true and objective reality of conflict, the two could not take into account, that take into account the views are more likely to lead to subjectivity, and this is the most obvious sign of a country under the rule of law, is also one of the principles of our rule of law. So, what is should adhere to our lawyer? I think, should be lawyers insist is legal truth or evidence standard. 

 Last year America visit to Simpson's defense lawyer Dershowitz talked about this issue, his conversation was very meaningful. He talked about USA lawyers and defendants talk, do not blindly get to the root of things to ask the defendant to tell the truth, but mainly to understand the evidence. Although the law is the duty of confidentiality, but it is not necessary to elicit the truth. Because the defendant does not speak the truth, two even if the defendant confessed to the crime, no other evidence to support can not be convicted, moreover some defendants pleaded guilty is not necessarily true. So, the lawyer is to understand and to obtain evidence, use evidence to speak. If there is evidence that the guilty, it should not be pleaded not guilty; otherwise, it shall be pleaded not guilty. I think, this principle is not wrong. Because legally guilty basis, is the only evidence. I think, not only lawyers shall do so, judges and prosecutors should also do so, but our lawyers should also become more aware, more deeply on the relationship between legal truth and objective truth, should be further discussed, which is conducive to the realization of the principle of the rule of law depends on the conviction, in order to promote the rule of law and judicial justice.

Three, handling difficult cases shall benefit by mutual discussion in order to ensure the quality of handling cases.

  Handling difficult cases it is best to take collective discussion, benefit by mutual discussion. Now some law firm is doing, but as far as I know there is not universal, most law firms can't do it. Can say, our lawyers are basically still in the state of lacking spirit of cooperation, fight the enemy separately, the lawyers busy to cope with his case, few firms can collective discussion system. If the lawyer handling major cases to appear before court in collective discussion, have the lawyers to attend, after the court summarized comments, I think it is a very useful way. This can give full play to collective action, reduce errors, and improve the overall level of lawyers. Now the case is too complicated, especially after the implementation of the new criminal law, the increase in the number of new charges. Frankly speaking, some new charges of new criminal law, especially in some economic crimes, financial and securities crimes charges, until today, the legislators themselves are not clear, scholars themselves are not clear, so that the experts also often have differences. The reason is very simple, our law experts and not a financial expert, nor bill expert, and, our securities market, the financial market is still in the primary stage, the development of the market is not mature. But in order to maintain order in the market, timely legislation is necessary, this is a reality, the conflict can not be avoided. The existence of this contradiction, will inevitably cause some problems in judicial work. Sometimes we will blame the judicial personnel level is low, this phenomenon does, but in turn thought, some even experts in the research question, how good too to judges, prosecutors and lawyers are able to accurately grasp? This is a transition state, is an objective existence of the problem, but whatever the reason, since the problem has already been put in here, we should face. As a lawyer, facing these complex issues, if we can benefit by mutual discussion, fully discussed, including even ask the expert, to clear it up, on their own is also a raise. I think, the lawyer handling errors really a great responsibility, and I know that some lawyers error is very serious. For example, obviously guilty case just as guilty plea, is obviously the defense case could see no defensive in nature, similar examples are not uncommon. A sad sometimes arises is: the investigation organ muddleheaded ground investigation, procuratorial organs prosecution lawyers muddleheaded, muddleheaded ground defense, court muddleheaded conviction, finally the defendant also sleepwalk pleaded guilty. Since these four aspects are considered the defendant guilty, what is there to say? Although this is just an individual case, but such a result, can not say no responsibility law, judicial organs in handling cases to stand the test, the lawyer is no exception. Although no provisions of lawyers have misjudged case investigation of criminal law, no economic compensation, but the lawyer can not have no sense of responsibility, can not forgive their mistakes. Therefore, our lawyers in handling difficult cases, we must strive for benefit by mutual discussion, to be responsible for the quality of handling cases. 

Four, the sensitivity of major cases should be avoided in human relationship.

 As far as I know, our law firm has some special is the relationship between lawyers, specialized in relationship, the lawyer is not too much to study business, as long as the judges, prosecutors, please come out to discuss a, you say how to do it, help me to solve it, this situation does exist. Why this trend? I always think, both objective reasons, there are subjective reasons. There is a view that lawyers are corrupted judges, prosecutors, lawyers are troubles. I think this is a problem, the reason is very simple, lawyers who are not dumb enough to want to put their money to give to others. From the big side, or the judicial environment causes, specifically speaking, the main responsibility is not in the law, because the lawyer is not representative of the power, also do not have the power. There is an environmental force you to do so, some of this should be the normal thing to do, you don't go home no human relationship, this is a reality we face. But in turn, also cannot say we lawyers had no problem, at least the lawyer should not take the initiative to cater to this trend, but not the main means of this as a case. I have heard some of the judges, judges and lawyers very close relationship, often eat together, drink, but also look down upon these lawyers, think these lawyers will pull the relationship, not to do business. This evaluation is illustrative. So, the lawyer must pay attention to correct its atmosphere. On major sensitive cases, this style should avoid as far as possible, if not handled properly, may not only harm, and oneself, the consequence is more serious. Lawyers, must depend on the evidence, in accordance with the law, this is the principle, is the premise, must not have the order reversed. 

Five, to promote the legislation of evidence, in order to fundamentally solve the problem of torture to extract confessions, witnesses, evidence showing the problem.

 For a long time, torture to extract confessions, witnesses, evidence showing problems are serious obstacle for the criminal defense and obstruction of justice. In major cases, these problems are relatively more prominent, that directly affect the impartiality of judgment. Encounter this kind of situation? A lawyer should be dutiful to exercise their rights, to strive for to the court and prosecutor and reflect, this is a major question of principle, can't accommodate, not to pay no heed, listen but not hear. However, this problem is hard to solve, especially relating to torture to extract confessions, are difficult to find evidence, it would offend the investigation organ. This time in Tieling's case, this issue reflects very prominent. The trial the defendant of torture to extract confessions problem is very serious, most of the 22 defendants are charged, and specific description of a plot. The defendant pre-trial record confession strikingly similar, even not at the scene of the co accused of "crime" process occurs in the preliminary transcript of the trial after the statement, confession is strikingly similar, and, in the strict custody measures the defendant does not have the collusion condition, even with the defendant lawyer cannot alone. The court reflected, principle, do not adhere to the law can not be otherwise, on the contrary to occupation moral, is on the national rule of law is not responsible. Show that the judicial practice, a series of issues related to torture to extract confessions, witnesses, evidence shows, has significantly affect judicial justice and criminal defense role, but these problems only by the efforts of the bar is not solved. Only by relying on the clear legal provisions can be solved. Therefore we should deeply research on these problems, the accumulation of cases, in order to promote the evidence law as soon as possible to create conditions. 

 At present, the research evidence legislation is very warm, all aspects are concerned, the legislature, lawyers, academics, judicial circles have hope to solve these problems in the legislation. From the discussion of the situation, there are several issues worthy of our special attention.

 1, about the right to silence. Can say, the silence power system is an important way to prevent torture to extract confessions. If the defendant the right to silence, the effect is not very important, will reduce the driving force of torture to extract confessions, which will fundamentally undermine the oral confession is the king of evidence concept. In fact, the right of silence and frankly leniency policy are not contradictory, because the silence is a right but not the obligation, the difference is only resist not strictly. 

 2, a clear the proof responsibility of torture to extract confessions. This is another way of preventing torture to extract confessions. In foreign countries, about the burden of proof is on the prosecution torture to extract confessions, as long as the defendants and lawyers raised questions, the prosecution to prove no torture to extract confessions. Why? Because you want proof is impossible, he is in a special environment, not proof. In court, we often encounter this problem, when the defendant a torture to extract confessions problem, the prosecution to the defendant, in most cases, the court also feel helpless. Therefore, in the legislation should be the burden of torture to extract confessions stipulates for the prosecution. 

 3, a lawyer present investigative interrogation of a defendant should be the problem. In foreign countries, the police interrogation must be a lawyer, and the lawyers met with the police is not present, even need to be present, also can only see and can't hear the conversation. At present in our country the contrary. Voice of the problem also is strong, such as can be resolved, plays an important role in preventing torture to extract confessions. 

 4, the problem about the witnesses to appear in court. This question is very important. Over the years, we are often not to appear in court convicted on the basis of the testimony of a witness, this approach is not science, because the back-to-back testimony cannot accept the testimony, the reliability and the accuracy is difficult to guarantee. During the Cultural Revolution by some building materials added, the emergence of a large number of cases, this lesson is to illustrate the problem. The foreign court basically rejected the testimony of witnesses, the testimony of witnesses were regarded as hearsay evidence, asked the witness must appear in court. Because the evidence collection process, does not appear in court testimony of specific background is not clear, but the witness appearing in court as a witness in cross examination once, will expose problems. If we can solve the problem of witness appearing in court, may prevent the occurrence of a lot of misjudged cases. 

 5, the evidence shows problems. On the evidence shows problems have been discussed repeatedly, the most high, the Ministry of justice and the national IBA drafting preliminary scheme. There are two main focus of dispute: one is about the exhibition place and manner; another is both sides should peer display. Prosecutors insist on display, we insist on not peer display. There are two reasons: one is the litigant principle, should not be equal, because in the criminal litigation, the burden of proof in the prosecution, not the. In the world no country is peer to peer shows, are controlled direction the unreserved show, the prosecution argued direction only limited display, for example, the defendant is not evidence at the scene, defense, hedging evidence, the insufficient legal responsibility age evidence and so on, in addition to legal listed several evidence to the Ming the outer, other can not display. This is the internationally accepted principles. Two if we peer display, the lawyer will face some new trap. Later defense witness testimony and some relevant evidence to the present, the objective conditions control the witness, witness testimony is likely to force change, and may therefore groundless prejudice witness to the criminal responsibility shall be investigated for lawyers. We should promote as soon as possible the implementation of the system, but must adhere to the principle of. 

Six, straighten out the relations between the two sides, to promote a high level of work style.

 In major cases, all kinds of contradictions are relatively concentrated, sensitive factors, lawyers should not only have principles, but also have a sincere, restraint and self protection consciousness. Give up the principle of law cannot, but try to avoid unnecessary conflict. 

 In the larger differences between the two sides in the case, the conflict is prone to the court debate, it will not only affect the trial effect, and sometimes to the lawyer is also very unfavorable. So, in this case, more should be advocated a peaceful, active, full debate style, persuade through reasoning, prevent emotional impulse. 

 Along with the defense system continues to mature, the development of the construction of rule of law, at present, I believe that the parties should be toward normalization, namely, both sides should fight, but this confrontation should be rational. Therefore, in the defense system has become increasingly mature today, we should strive to seek and promote the bilateral relations to a rational confrontation. Can say, this was the third stage in the development of relations between the two sides of the stage -- Rational confrontation, but also toward normalization stage. 

 And this confrontation relations adapts, our court activities should be up to the next level, our court debate shall be carried out in a calm, active, full of atmosphere. The so-called peace, active, fully, is accused of between the two parties in the debate in the gentle attitude, not against each other, there is no sword dial distension posture; debate can be active in the relaxed atmosphere of dialogue; comments can fully express without interference. In fact, only in this debate and atmosphere can be more fully play the role of both sides, and provide objective, the real basis to make a fair judgment for court. Can say, in recent years, the foundation for achieving such goals have begun to appear, also many cases of successful attempt. Among them, I experienced in Nanjing, Beijing, Dalian three trial is very typical case. These three cases are related to the crime and innocence boundaries, some trial has been sentenced to life imprisonment, the defense is pleaded not guilty. But the court debate was intense but not conflict, the court was rational and calm, so that the recess three parties to come together to greet each other and continue to earnestly to discuss this case. This court atmosphere is very meaningful to a fair trial, at least can lay a foundation for the court to the next. Of course, this kind of atmosphere needs to achieve three party to cooperate, but our lawyers have great initiative, we should try to create such an environment and atmosphere.

Seven in practice, actively seek the guidance and support of law departments, to reverse the situation of fight in isolation. 

 When faced with difficulties and problems, the timely initiative and law departments contact, seek the guidance and support, this is a very important point. As mentioned before, the lawyer fight in isolation is widespread at present, this kind of phenomenon should be changed as soon as possible. My personal experience, the Beijing Bar Association and the Beijing Judicial Bureau these years to pay more attention to this problem, the lawyer also tasted the sweetness of. This interaction is a process, more attention to more willing to ask for more, more, forming a virtuous circle, so as to prevent some possible problems, the objective is to solve some problems. I think, this kind of communication, coordination and support is not only conducive to the practice of law, but also embodies the judicial administrative organ and the role of lawyers association. Objectively speaking, so far, our lawyers association function is far did not receive due attention, some people say that lawyers association with pigeon association almost, can't compare with the football association. Of course, reversing the bias need a process, also need a certain environment, but more important to our own efforts. If we join forces and then a large number of lawyers, lawyers' Association to do some more work, more can reflect their own role, will enable the public to have an objective understanding. At present, the association of Beijing has been a very significant breakthrough: a meeting in the city of Beijing politics and Law Committee of Lawyers Association, responsible person can participate in, can achieve this point is not easy. So, a lot of things to fight for, to rely on their own efforts. Only in the bar association's position has been enough attention, can more fully play, lawyers fight in isolation, lacking spirit of cooperation has been completely reverse the situation, the overall status of the lawyers will really improve, will lawyers paid great attention to by the whole society. 

Eight, a criminal defense lawyer in urgent need of strengthening the basic business training, to meet the challenges.

 At present, the quality and level of our country lawyer difference is very big, some lawyers level is very poor, even in the handling of a case in even the basic reasons are not clear. This lawyer fighting man, really is a problem. So, hope that law departments and the association of major cases of lawyers to be given special attention, at the same time, to strengthen regular training for lawyers. 

 Admittedly, compared with the judges and prosecutors, in service training and quality training, lawyers are weak, the weak is mainly reflected in the following three aspects: one is with the financial constraints, we lack sufficient funding and organizational form efficient lawyer and centralized training; two lawyers are the nature of their work, the lawyer is to rely on professional activities and survival, the timing is often involuntarily; three is the lawyer training the lack of targeted content and system. In three aspects, the first two problems will be discussed from mechanism, such as how to mobilize and use of training funds, how to plan the training system and the time arrangement etc.. The third problem is easy to solve, is the main consideration should be given to arrange appropriate training contents. At present, we carried out a variety of training lawyers, add more content, the content is less timely assistance. For example, a lawyer from received the case, how do the procedures, how to meet the criminal suspect and the defendant? How the investigation? How to? So, in these most basic operating procedures is the lack of training. I made so many lawyers, but no one taught me how to handle a case, are out of their own to explore, and so are other lawyers. So, do not know many lawyers even the basic rules, is in fact act as one pleases, groping forward. Sometimes I in the field case, found that some lawyers way is a problem, it must pay attention to. So, I think a lawyer training should start from the basis. The lawyer business field is very broad, each have their own characteristics and requirements. Therefore, should according to the characteristics of different business areas to strengthen the training on the basic operating procedures. 

Nine, a criminal defense lawyer duty location and value orientation of deep thinking.

 The value orientation of responsibility and criminal defense lawyer look about, this is a fundamental problem, but also is a deep topic. This is because, as the recovery of our lawyer system time is too short, the study on this issue is not deep enough, people still lack the correct understanding of the problem, even in the concept has the very big difference. Can be said that, so far, both the general public in society, or the judicial organ, as well as the law itself, there are such problems. The strength and the society and this problem is directly related to the lawyer's point of view, evaluation. 

 I think, the most basic duty lawyer, is to safeguard the legitimate rights of the defendant by the realization of judicial justice and judicial fairness, such functions are implemented as in the litigation process and the relative anti way, namely to control for justice. Can say, confrontation is a means, and the realization of judicial justice is the ultimate objective. Defense activities can not only achieve justice, but also embodies judicial justice and judicial justice, because if it cannot be disclosed embodiment, it belongs to a kind of invisible justice, will not be able to get the approval of the society, so it is difficult to show the meaning of justice. Judicial fairness mainly reflected in the impartiality and openness of the judicial process, in the litigation activities have lawyers, lawyer activities can not only fully safeguarding the defendant's rights and interests, reduce the likelihood of wrongful convictions, and can prove to the world that this sentence is true justice. For example, a commit the most heinous crimes accused, after a powerful defense lawyers still proved to commit the most heinous crimes, people will no doubt the fairness of the judgment, because this kind of justice has passed the defense has been fully embodied. So, defence counsel in the activity can not simple to victory or defeat hero, but to see whether it is sufficient to make the defense duty and the defense function. If the lawyers can win every argument, then, there is no real crime, procuratorial organs shall also revoke the. Vice versa, if the public prosecutor can win every action, then the defense system has no necessity of existence. So, the defense on both sides of the functional positioning and angle is different, the pursuit of the objectives and ways of thinking will also have the difference, which is the necessity of the confrontation between. In reality, we often hear two different views: some prosecutors felt sorry for acquittal cases, think "v. long, white suit, is really a waste all the previous efforts"; some lawyers have a sense of loss for the convicted cases, think "debate for a long time, white argues, it is in vain strength." For a fair judgment, these two kinds of complaints are made the same error: no clear responsibility positioning themselves.

 The duty lawyer positioning and associated, has more practical significance for the deep thinking on the value orientation of defense activities. Specifically, in the "strike hard" and the anti-corruption struggle, lawyers should be how to play the role? Is to strengthen the function of defense? Or weaken the defense function? What kind of choice is more favorable to the strengthening of the rule of law? This involves the value orientation of defense activities. The reality for the "strike hard" and the anti-corruption struggle, if the weakened defense function way, can reduce the obstacles in the investigation and trial, alleviate many contradictions. Because the investigation, prosecution and trial of link, it does have a lot of difficulties, there are difficulties, but the lawyer of carp, and indeed to the formation of some of the obstacles, this is a very real problem. So, what should strengthen the defense activities? Or should weaken the defense activities? Selection is the value orientation of the defense activities. 

 Simply put, this choice involves deep or shallow layers is matched with the problem. Although my personal point of view is not mature, but I still advocate to strengthen the defense lawyer's function to select a deep cooperation, otherwise, eyes seem to be favorable, but the long run will make the defence system change, will make the rule of law construction setbacks. The establishment of lawyer defense system is based on such a principle to combat and control for justice, the only way to realize and judicial fairness. At present the social evaluation of lawyers and requirements, or too high or too low, not know what course to take, so that even the law itself, in the final analysis, the position of a lawyer duty not clear. In fact, the lawyer is not the devil, also not an angel; lawyers are neither represents evil, cannot represent justice, the role of lawyers only through the entire process of judicial activities to achieve justice, and justice. It is only a part of the judicial justice process, but this part is indispensable. So, if the strengthening the role of lawyers from the deep with the point of view, from a long-term point of view, I think that is correct, but the difficulty at present is more and more, also increase the investigation organ and judicial organ work difficulty, this is a contradiction. How to solve this contradiction, only by the people to further explore.