Chapter 29.2

After both sides finished questioning, Zhao Chuchu was led away. As she left, she didn’t dare lift her head, nor did she dare look at Ye Nianwen again.

Once the witness questioning concluded, the various pieces of evidence were presented. The court investigation phase ended, and the trial moved into the debate phase.

In a rape case that took place in a closed environment, aside from biological evidence, much of it depended on the statements of the parties involved, witness testimonies, and logical inferences.

The case had reached a deadlock. Both the victim and the defendant had completely opposing accounts, and neither side had enough evidence to substantiate their claims.

Fan Jiancheng had no evidence to prove that Ye Sibei had flirted with or threatened him.

Ye Sibei had indeed been pressured into drinking and was drunk, which could have impaired her judgment.

The incident occurred in a closed environment, which could have created a scenario where Ye Sibei was coerced.

Lin Feng’s testimony, on the other hand, suggested that Ye Sibei’s mental state at the time did not align with Fan Jiancheng’s claim of an extortion attempt.

Ye Sibai reported the incident to the police immediately, and since she and Fan Jiancheng had no prior intimate relationship that could justify consensual sexual activity, it is reasonable to assume that this was most likely a case of rape.

However, Ye Sibai’s behavior raised doubts. She was short on money, carried condoms with her, cooperated fully during the event, reported the crime multiple times, and her testimony differed from objective evidence such as photos and recordings—actions that seemed contrary to common sense. 

It’s also possible this was a scenario she orchestrated herself—a classic “honey trap.” She deceived Lin Feng and deliberately set up Fan Jiancheng.

“She showed no signs of resistance throughout the entire process, and even cooperated. She claims she resisted, but the only scratch marks are on my client’s left shoulder. The location and direction of the scratch indicate it was most likely caused by an embrace, not resistance. In fact, this could be interpreted as active participation,” Meng Xin pointed out.

“According to the victim’s testimony, it was all due to coercion. Not resisting and cooperating doesn’t prove the victim was willing. On the contrary, given that the suspect brought the intoxicated victim to a confined space where she couldn’t resist, and considering their lack of a personal relationship, it is more likely this was forced than consensual,” the prosecutor argued.

“If Ye Sibai is telling the truth, then why are there so many contradictions between her description of events and the physical evidence? She said she only made one phone call, but there are records of two. She said she didn’t see the suspect, but there’s a photo showing her with her eyes open. She wasn’t blindfolded the entire time. Her testimony doesn’t match the evidence.”

“The first call could have been deleted by Fan Jiancheng, and the photo might have been taken while she was intoxicated and not fully aware,” the prosecutor countered. “If Ye Sibai made the call, and if she was fully conscious, aware she was being photographed, how could she forget this phone call and the photo? She should have come up with a better lie. In fact, that photo could be key evidence proving her impaired state of mind at the time.”

“She usually drinks about two liang of alcohol. All the witnesses, including herself, confirmed that the amount she drank that day wouldn’t have been enough to cause complete unconsciousness. Furthermore, Zhao Chuchu testified that when they parted, Ye Sibai was able to recognize people, make calls, and speak logically. It’s unlikely she was as disoriented as the prosecution claims. The prosecutor’s hypothesis lacks objective support.”

“There is no direct evidence to prove the victim blackmailed the suspect. That’s purely the suspect’s claim. In fact, we have additional audio evidence that proves the victim maintained her resolve to press charges even when offered a bribe by the company. If she was in it for the money, she would have dropped the case.”

“That recording was made by the victim herself, showing she was very legally cautious. This actually supports the idea that if she had intended to extort my client, she wouldn’t have left him the opportunity to gather evidence against her,” Meng Xin argued.

Both sides debated fiercely, challenging each other’s evidence, witness statements, and logic.

Neither side had ironclad evidence and could only try to find flaws in the other’s case.

Compared to Fan Jiancheng, Ye Sibai’s testimony contained more contradictions.

She said she only made one call, but there were records of two.

She said she resisted, but the only marks that could indicate resistance looked more like those from intimate contact.

She claimed she had no awareness during the event and that she was blindfolded, but her alcohol intake wouldn’t have caused complete unconsciousness, and Zhao Chuchu’s testimony further indicated that Ye Sibai was likely fully aware during the entire process, casting doubt on her claim of a blackout.

She also didn’t mention anything about using a condom, but there were condom wrappers at the scene.

She claimed Zhao Chuchu told her to carry condoms, but Zhao Chuchu denied this.

As the case approached its conclusion, both sides made their final arguments.

The prosecutor stood up first: “In this case, the suspect and victim had a superior-subordinate relationship with no prior romantic involvement, making the likelihood of consensual sexual relations very low. On the day of the incident, there was an abnormal amount of pressure to drink. As the superior, the suspect failed to intervene, allowing the excessive drinking to happen. There was a potential for premeditation. Surveillance and witness statements confirm the victim was intoxicated, and the suspect took her to an isolated reed field, a confined space where the victim couldn’t escape, likely creating a sense of mortal danger and forcing her to comply against her will. After the incident, the victim immediately reported it to the police and requested a semen analysis, demonstrating her firm resolve. Although she later withdrew the charges due to societal pressure, this is understandable. Based on biological evidence such as semen stains and skin flakes, we argue that Fan Jiancheng used coercion to force sexual relations with the victim, violating Article 236 of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China. The crime is clear, and we request the suspect be prosecuted for rape.”

After the prosecutor finished, Meng Xin stood up: “In this case, before the incident, the victim, in order to buy a house for her brother, falsified her salary with my client’s help. This led to her husband finding out about the loan, causing marital tension. It’s reasonable to infer that the victim had personal interactions with my client before this incident and that she was in desperate financial need, giving her a motive to falsely accuse my client. Throughout the case, my client’s statements have been consistent with the physical evidence, while the victim’s statements have numerous contradictions. Additionally, key witness Lin Feng is biased, making his testimony less reliable. The prosecution’s case relies heavily on assumptions, but from a logical standpoint, the victim’s behavior doesn’t align with that of someone who was coerced. She carried condoms, her alcohol intake wasn’t enough to make her lose consciousness, and despite knowing she would be alone with an older male colleague, she still asked him to take her home. Although she reported the incident, she didn’t immediately mention rape, waiting several days before making that claim. These actions do not conform to common sense. In contrast, my client’s account is more consistent and logically sound. Therefore, we believe that there is insufficient evidence to convict, and the charges against my client should be dismissed.”

After Meng Xin finished speaking, it was finally Ye Nianwen’s turn to speak. By then, Ye Nianwen already had a sense of the outcome.

He stood up, unsure of what to say. The prosecution had already made every effort, and as a lawyer for the civil lawsuit, he couldn’t present many strong arguments.

He stood there, eyes red, and after a long silence, he finally spoke in a hoarse voice, “Ye Sibei is my sister. She has always been a very careful person.”

Everyone was looking at him. He raised his head and slowly revealed the softer side of the woman who had been debated so rationally in court all morning.

“She loves beauty but doesn’t even dare to show her arms. She likes makeup but never puts on bright colors. She almost never goes out at night, and most of the time, my dad or my brother-in-law would pick her up and drop her off. When she was attacked, she was wearing that suit, the company uniform. She’s always been very self-conscious about it. Every time she went to work, even in the summer, she would wear a trench coat over it. So, on the day she called the police and asked for a trench coat, it was because, for her, that coat was a form of protection, a safeguard for her body. Without it, her request to the police was actually her cry for help.”

As Ye Nianwen spoke, tears streamed down his face.

He knew, at over twenty years old and as a lawyer, he shouldn’t lose his composure in public like this.

But he couldn’t stop, his voice trembling, choked with sobs.