Chapter 317: Chapter 132: Threatening the enemy with your life? What was he thinking?_2

Old Tang directly said, "Mr. Jin, stop talking; reconciliation is impossible. Your son's grudge against me is likely to last a lifetime, so why should I forgive an enemy?"

As for threatening to jump off the building... he didn't jump on the spot, and as long as the duty to persuade is fulfilled, that's enough.

Otherwise, in this day and age, we might as well not do anything. You won't forgive, so you'll commit suicide? Then go ahead and commit suicide. Of course, I would definitely not say that, but what you choose to do is up to you.

Using your own life to threaten an enemy—what a foolish idea.

Your life is probably only valued by your parents.

Inside, Jin Xintian watched as Tang Fangjing didn't even turn his head, acting as if he had gone mad. The pride he took in his self-esteem was worth less than nothing in the eyes of the young lawyer opposite him.

For a moment, he truly wanted to jump, but... better to live a bad life than to die a good death.

Thinking of death brought an inexplicable fear. Sometimes saying "I'm going to jump" is just a way to vent emotions, to scare others.

Old Tang returned to the hotel. He did not tell Chi Yan about this trip. As an excellent lawyer, he was very aware of his own appeal.

But as the saying goes, one cannot have all the good things in life.

He could be undefeated, with administrative lawsuits leaving agencies in disarray and taking on any and all litigation because of his current identity.

Having attachments means hesitations; trying to consider every aspect. When others go all out, he would hesitate, and in this business, hesitation is not an option.

You either don't do it or you go all out; hesitation only leads to defeat.

At home, Chen Jiaquan was nearly sick with anger looking at the news online.

Netizens were all saying he had lost, but he hadn't lost. There hadn't been much of a conversation between them!

The court session began, and a few sentences from the opposing lawyer soon dissipated Old Tang's interest.

What should not be said was omitted, and the approach was not much different from the ways he taught in the past: if you can't argue the facts, attack the procedure; if the procedure doesn't work, appeal to emotions...

A lawyer in there pleading for your sympathy, saying the other party is still young, and so on...

Do you think this is a joke? No, some lawyers in court are even worse than this.

So, Old Tang didn't interrupt much from beginning to end, enjoying the performance thoroughly and reflecting on his past life.

Somewhat guiltily, he felt as though dying at someone's hands might be expected, considering the wrongdoing of his past life.

What should have been a forty-minute court session was drawn out to an hour and a half, and that was only because the presiding judge couldn't put up with it any longer; he rebuked the lawyer on the spot, causing him to finally stop his performance.

Old Tang heard that, afterwards, they were still explaining to Jin Xintian's parents that there was nothing they could do—the judge had scolded them.

This tactic was too jarring to the eyes. Haven't you changed your methods over so many years? They were almost indistinguishable from what I used to teach.

Then, after adjourning and returning for the verdict: the defendant Jin Xintian was found guilty of defamation and sentenced to six months in prison—yes, without the possibility of a suspended sentence, which was even heavier than Zheng Baolin's sentence.

Because both the defense attorney and he did not think it was a crime, there was no indication of remorse or repentance, not to mention the direct attack on the judge...

Old Tang sighed; there are reasons why services are expensive.

So, some may ask, how come the dogged type has lasted so many years of gimmicks without ruining their reputation?

Of course not. Not every case is like this. Sometimes they stumble upon one, and a case that was supposed to result in conviction ends up being acquitted!

That's something to publicize heavily. When ordinary people look for a lawyer, if one tells you they can argue for a reduced sentence and another tells you they can argue for acquittal, with the latter having many cases on hand, who would you choose?