Zhou Wei's argument was very simple-
There was no evidence proving that Lin Wenjie had deliberately sold expensive medicine.
Nor was there evidence showing that Lin Wenjie had hinted to Li Dong that he should have an official seal made.
Under these circumstances, the statements made by the appellant's counsel, Su Bai, were extremely weak.
They could not substantiate the accusation.
Meanwhile, after hearing Zhou Wei's statements, the viewers watching the livestream reacted.
Many were furious.
Quite a few locals even spoke up to condemn him. "What a load of bullshit from that lawyer!"
"Who around here doesn't know that the Second Hospital prescribes counterfeit medicine? It doesn't cure anyone, and it costs a damn fortune!"
"To people who know what's going on, Lin Wenjie is practically a crooked doctor!"
"Saying he had no motive is complete bullshit!"
However, many legally knowledgeable people who had learned the actual circumstances in the comments still pointed out the key to Zhou Wei's argument.
"Honestly, the hospital lawyer has a point. How can you reach a finding without evidence?"
"Without evidence, you simply can't!"
"Can Lawyer Su produce the corresponding evidence to prove it? That seems pretty unlikely!"
"..."
Some people in the comments pointed out that no finding could be made without evidence. That was correct.
Or rather, there was nothing wrong with that.
But how did Su Bai see it?
In Su Bai's view, there was nothing wrong with Zhou Wei's statements.
He indeed could not produce any evidence showing that Lin Wenjie had hinted anything to Li Dong.
But why had he actually made those statements?
That required returning to the case itself. What was the most crucial part of this case?
The most crucial issue was still arguing for a reduced sentence!
As for the charge of picking quarrels