1. The prosecution actually relied on circumstantial evidence to prosecute the crime of homicide. The circumstantial evidence is very weak, and even the appraisers said they could not see clearly when they zoomed in. May I ask why you concluded that it was the victim and not some other third party? ? Wasn't there a murder weapon there? What about the fingerprints on the murder weapon? Did the victim's body have any defensive injuries? ? Is it easy to subdue a grown man? ? Wouldn't there be blood on the suspect if he was going to fight? In short, aside from the remains of the murder weapon, is it bullying our audience for such a large-scale description of a cctv! !
2 The suspect committed suicide and died, public opinion attacked the prosecution, and the male protagonist may even step down. But if the question is really unjust, isn't the main target of the scolding not the presiding judge who hastily closed the case? ? The prosecution was originally trying to prove that the suspect was guilty. This is the prosecutor's job, okay? ? Of course, forging evidence is definitely guilty, but the evidence in question is not fabricated, it is just very weak, so let’s go back to 1. How did you convict? ? Judge, are you blind? !
3 It's the third episode. In the third episode, the police thought to investigate the call records in front of the deceased, or the prosecutors went to check the mother of the deceased to think of this line. Are you a public security officer in the Republic of Korea? Police, can you do what you need to do? Thank you! ! !
4 After the second victim appeared, none of the police and forensics confirmed the death of the victim? ? ? Just because the victim was lying there covered in blood? ? ? Can you be professional? ? ? The screenwriter completely sacrificed police intelligence to create an atmosphere. And can the prosecutor swagger into the crime scene? ? ? ? What do you want the police to do? ? ? ? ?
View more about Stranger reviews
