Just after New Year's Day this year, one afternoon, the editor-in-chief in charge of the newspaper pointed to two pieces of paper on his desk and said to me, "Liu Jie (this person used to be named Liu Jingjie, alias Liu Jie, and she often deliberately changed her name, which makes people confused) sued the newspaper!"

According to the indictment, the defendant published three articles in China Youth Daily published on February 8 and February 10, 2003: unveiling the first moon in China, shaping the first moon in China in this way, and vaguely promoting Liu Jie, which contained a lot of insults and slanders to the plaintiff's reputation and personality.

Maybe even the boss is a little surprised. My reaction was not nervousness, but a little excitement.

I immediately remembered that one day in June, last year, I accidentally received a phone call from Liu Jie.

This is a long-lost phone call. Since February 8, 2003, reporter Liu Fang and I have published a series of reports on "Unveiling the First Moon in China" in the headlines of this newspaper. After that, Liu Jie went to the newspaper to "crusade" once. I haven't heard from her for a long time since SARS. She asked me if I had time on the phone, and wanted to find a place to invite me out to sit at night. I refused her invitation and told her that if anything happened, you could come to the newspaper to see me tomorrow morning.

Like every previous date, the morning passed, but she was nowhere to be seen. Just before lunch, Liu Jie's phone came. "I'm going to court to sue you. Now I just want to confirm with you, is the editor-in-chief of your newspaper Li Xueqian? " I can hear that there is something smug and tentative in her words. I replied, "Yes, the legal representative is Li Xueqian. But in this way, there is no need for us to meet alone, so let's see you in court! "

More than one reporter asked me, "Before unveiling the first month of China, did you ever think that you might get into a lawsuit?"

Of course. I dare to lift the veil because I am confident that this group of reports is based on carefully investigated facts.

I think news reports should be based on facts, and courts should also be based on facts. With the confidence to win, I once again face "China's first month".

As evidence: go to Wuhai in the west and fly to Wenzhou in the east.

Litigation is evidence.

We clearly know that Liu Jie abused the right of appeal this time, but tactically, we should not underestimate it. She put forward 17 so-called infringement points for the report, and listed more than 40 evidences in the evidence catalogue. Although many of the evidences she submitted to the court are contradictory, including false testimony and perjury, we take every evidence seriously, because a slight negligence may bring unnecessary reputation loss to the newspaper.

Although a lot of evidence was retained during the interview, more evidence must be collected for the allegations in Liu Jie's indictment.

In the days around the Spring Festival, I almost completely gave up my rest time and kept shuttling back and forth in Beijing. I have been to Beijing Library, Haidian Bookstore, 16 bus stop, and California Beef Noodle Restaurant, and invited my interviewed parents and parties to review the facts involved in the original interview, and asked key people to leave testimony on key events and determine the list of witnesses who can testify in court.

On February 23rd, I boarded the westbound train bound for Baotou and Wuhai, Inner Mongolia, and made a special trip to learn about Liu Jie's true identity and her working experience in Wuhai People's Hospital.

Liu Jie's trip to Wenzhou is one of the important contents of "Unveiling the First Moon in China". In order to deny that he used his early education in Wenzhou to make a fortune, Liu Jie openly used the method of stealing columns and fabricated a "Liu Jingjie" out of thin air, falsely claiming that it was "Liu Jingjie" who went to Wenzhou instead of himself, and was helping the poor in the suburbs of Beijing at that time, thus accusing this newspaper of inaccurate articles.

Is that really the case?

Careful people noticed that these two "Liu Jingjie" not only have the same name and surname, but also were born on the same day of the same year, both of whom are women, both from Wuhai City, Inner Mongolia. The only difference is that the ID number differs by one number. The subtlety lies in the first four digits of 1502 and 1503! It is understood that the area codes of several big cities in Inner Mongolia are: Hohhot is 150 1, and Baotou is1502; Wuhai is 1503.

In Wuhai City Public Security Bureau and Baotou City Public Security Bureau, we obtained key evidence.

The household registration certificate issued by Daqing Road Police Station of Wuhai Public Security Bureau shows that Liu Jie, formerly known as Liu Jingjie, was born in1February 96415030319640265438 (the new ID number after replacement); The legal representative "Liu Jingjie" whose ID number is 1502036402 15002 was found by the Baotou Public Security Bureau that there was no such person at all. The holder of this ID card is Wang Moumou, a worker of the fifth rubber factory in this city.

After going west to Wuhai, I turned around and flew to Wenzhou on the southeast coast. I interviewed some parties in Wenzhou by telephone at the beginning, and now I want to ask them to give me witness testimony.

Beautiful Wenzhou is in the cold drizzle, but Wenzhou gives me warmth.

As soon as I dialed the phone, I found the important witness-the collaborator who invited Liu Jie to Wenzhou in the summer of 2002, the manager of Wenzhou Ziliyuan Company. As luck would have it, he just came back from Fuzhou, Jiangxi province that afternoon and was supposed to go to Shanghai that night. Being a little tired, he decided to change it to the next morning, but I didn't expect to catch him at once.

Wenzhou Daily's social news department director, reporters Zhou, Wu,, and other Wenzhou parents gave strong support. They are not only willing to testify, but also provide some new evidence, such as the original proof of remittance to Liu Jingjie's account.

Of course, there are times when there are setbacks. Chen Deyao, from Jinxiang Town, Cangnan County, Wenzhou, is the parent who was cheated out of 6,543.8+0,000 yuan of early education funds by Liu Jie as reported by Wenzhou Daily. I called him again and again, but he refused again and again. He said, "You must never come to Jinxiang to find me. I don't want to talk about Liu Jie anymore. What is the media exposure? So what if the public security organ asks? The money still didn't return, but it made people around you laugh. I am just an ordinary rural teacher, and my income is not very high, so I think I am unlucky! "

I understand his feelings.

a just cause enjoys abundant support while an unjust cause finds little

"Who are you for? Don't worry about our deceived parents! We firmly support you! If you need us to do anything, just tell us, and we will never be vague! "

Yang is a retired accountant of Beijing People's Machine Factory and a typical Beijinger. She speaks quickly and neatly, and encourages me every time I see her.

I feel lucky to meet such a group of parents who dare to take up legal weapons to safeguard their legitimate rights and interests. No one flinched when the court needed witnesses to testify in court.

As the true face of "the first moon in China" was revealed, I not only received more and more phone calls and information, but also obtained more and more new evidence.

After reporting to the Law Enforcement Brigade of Beijing Administration for Industry and Commerce, it was verified that the business license of "Beijingers at the Starting Point International Children's Education Consulting Center" registered in Liu Jie was revoked on August 2, 20031day because it did not participate in the annual inspection of the enterprise in 2002.

Miss Meng, who lives in Shuangyushu Community, Haidian District, Beijing, called to complain. On June 2nd this year, Liu Jie also came to my home and took away 65,438+100000 yuan in cash for early education service. I wonder if she can get it back.

Wang, a young woman from Bozhou, Anhui Province, wrote that Liu Jie cheated her of 2 1 10,000 yuan out of 70,000 yuan in the process of cooperation with Liu Jie. When she found out that Liu Jie was a contract fraud, she asked to return her share capital, but Liu Jie kept shirking and refused to return it.

Do more wrong things and you will die. It seems that the image of "the first moon in China" was artificially created and collapsed in a short time, which proves this truth again. (Xie Xiang)

Thinking after winning the case

In the first month, Liu Jie sued China Youth Daily and ended in failure.

Looking back at the beginning of the lawsuit, Liu Jie once expressed "full confidence" in winning the lawsuit, which reminded me of the case of Yang He, the "king of ideas" a few years ago. Yang He also made a generous statement in the court of second instance, and was eventually jailed for fraud.

In fact, both Yang He and Liu Jie are well aware of what they have done, but they are keen to fight reputation lawsuits with the media. The first reason is the conflict of interest-you lifted the veil of Liu Jie and prevented Yue Yue from making money. It's light to sue you. Secondly, reporting to the newspaper is the most convenient thing.

One of the conveniences is to wait and wait. In civil litigation, the plaintiff shall bring a lawsuit to a court with jurisdiction in accordance with the law. However, in the case of suing a newspaper for violating the right of reputation, the plaintiff's choice is much wider. The plaintiff can choose the location of the newspaper, choose his own door and go to the court where no one is nearby. For example, a few years ago, someone sued a Beijing newspaper from Xianyang to Xi 'an on the grounds that the circulation of the newspaper in Xi 'an was larger than that in Xianyang, and the court in Xi 'an still accepted it. Therefore, in foreign reputation cases, most newspapers are defendants. I haven't made statistics, but I think honor cases should account for a considerable proportion of civil cases in which jurisdiction objections are raised. There may be successful objections, but they are by no means the majority.

Second, it is convenient, the reason is easy to find, and there is no need to prepare evidence. A report ranges from a few hundred words to several thousand words. Even if you can't find a "hard wound", some words can still be entangled. For example, if you say "run away" in never say goodbye, it is an infringement of the right of reputation, because only the suspects involved will "run away". Look at the content of Liu Jie's complaint. There are many reasons for this: For example, there is a subtitle in the report "Smart Wenzhou people were calculated by (Liu Jie)", and Liu Jie's lawyer talked about how the word "calculation" was defamed in court; The title of Guo Gai's article is "This is how the first moon in China was shaped", and this title has also been sued for infringing Liu Jie's reputation, which is incredible.

The third convenience is that it costs little. A lawsuit in Liu Jie only cost 80 yuan legal fees.

The fourth convenience is that the risk is not great. No matter how absurd your cause of action is, no matter how many lies you tell in court, even if you lose the lawsuit, Liu Jie will not lose anything, because it has been publicly exposed by the media anyway.

On the contrary, media and journalists are not only costly, but also risky.

The first is the cost and risk of obtaining evidence. Journalists' coverage of news facts is different from that of public security law, and the consequences are different; The standards for media and journalists to judge the truth of news events are also different from those for judicial personnel to judge the truth of cases. The responsibilities and rights of journalists are more different from those of public security law investigators.

However, there is no news legislation in China to regulate the collection, dissemination and release of news, and there is no news law to define and protect journalists' responsibilities and rights. "Civil Procedure Law" requires the same evidence for reputation litigation caused by news reports as other civil litigation-documentary evidence and physical evidence must be original, and the person who provides news facts must either testify in court or have signed testimony. These evidences, which are not difficult for ordinary civil litigants, are sometimes not easy for the media and journalists. For example, the Jiahe demolition incident. If Jiahe county government takes relevant media and journalists to court on the grounds of infringement of reputation, I think it is difficult for the defendant to get the red-headed documents of Jiahe county government demolition, and I doubt whether all the people interviewed dare to testify in court. Even without pressure and fear, witnesses may refuse to testify for fear of trouble.

Therefore, once the media is sued for infringement, the first thing they face is the risk of difficulty in obtaining evidence. Then, reporters have to face complicated evidence collection, and sometimes they have to repeat almost all interviews. With the popularization of science and technology, journalists have tape recorders, but some news can't be interviewed with tape recorders. Therefore, when the newspaper is sued, the reporter who wrote the manuscript should put down all his work to obtain evidence, specifically, to make the materials obtained from the news interview meet the formal requirements of the civil procedure law for evidence. Counting the travel expenses of journalists and the expenses involved in witnesses appearing in court, I am afraid it is also an expensive expense.

Back in the Liu Jie case, the court of first instance rejected Liu Jie's claim, but I'm afraid this matter is still pending, and Liu Jie may appeal, which is not afraid. The question is, who will protect the legitimate rights and interests of those parents who have been cheated by Liu Jie and have nowhere to complain? (Yan Wu)

Conduct news supervision within the scope of law

With the presiding judge's gavel ringing, the compelling case of "China's First Moon" v. China Youth Daily (first instance) which lasted for half a year finally came to an end. Although the result was expected, many people were secretly sweating before reading the verdict.

This kind of worry is not unreasonable. Since China began to have "news lawsuits" in 1980s, the media have been accused of performing the function of news supervision, and as a result, it is not uncommon for many media to lose cases. As a result, there is such a strange phenomenon in the press: the media safeguard social justice and public interests, expose and criticize those who do bad things, but they often become defendants afterwards, and even watch those who do bad things win the lawsuit. In turn, the media will apologize to him and even compensate him for "mental damages." This is also a social reason why news supervision is difficult to carry out at present.

Actually, it's not surprising to say it. The reason why the media lost the case is that the criticized people often take the way of "attacking one point, not as good as the rest" in litigation, except for the interference of forces other than the law in handling cases. Even if the general direction of your criticism is completely correct, the main facts and even most of the facts are true and reliable. As long as a few or even individual facts are inaccurate (or the evidence is insufficient), and even some words are inappropriate (for example, out of indignation, derogatory words are accidentally used), these will become the basis for the defendant to file a lawsuit and the reason for the media to lose the case.

This newspaper exposed the so-called "China's first moon", which not only safeguarded the public interest, but also won the lawsuit, because we were ready for the lawsuit from the first day of our intervention. Therefore, in the whole interview, everything involved should be handled in strict accordance with the law, so that there are both sources and evidence, making the interview process a process of investigation and evidence collection at the same time. This will be invincible in court.

"The first moon" not only has litigation experience, but also is good at exploiting legal loopholes. For example, she prepared two ID cards for herself: one is a real ID card named "Liu Jie" and the other is a fake ID card named "Liu Jingjie". She used different names and identities as needed to avoid legal responsibility. To this end, we went to the place where her identity card was issued and obtained conclusive evidence from the authoritative department. In addition, the judge skillfully identified her through many witnesses in the trial, and finally her deception was exposed in court.

"Taking facts as the basis and law as the criterion" is the basic principle for judges to judge cases, and it should also be the principle for media to supervise news. Litigation is evidence. As long as we maintain a just mentality of safeguarding public interests and carry out activities in strict accordance with the law, "victory" will definitely be in our hands. (Guo Jiakuan)

China Youth Daily, June 22, 2004.