Special Declaration: This article is an original work by Attorney Shao Shiwei. It represents only the personal views of the author and does not constitute legal consultation or legal advice on specific matters. For article reprints, legal consultations, or professional exchanges, please add: sswls66.
Upon receiving news that a family member has been criminally detained at a certain detention center, relatives or friends are inevitably anxious in the immediate aftermath: What offense led to their arrest? Will they be mistreated while in custody? How long will they be detained? Can they be released on bail (qubao houshen) first? Is hiring a lawyer useful? ... A flood of questions fills their utterly confused minds.
There is a saying in criminal cases regarding the "Golden 37 Days," which means that,the 37 days from the date the party is criminally detained constitute a critical period determining whether the party can be released on bail pending trial (temporarily regaining personal freedom). If the individual is not released from the detention center within these 37 days, there is a high probability that the party will remain in custody until the conclusion of the case.
Since relevant evidence and the party's statements have not yet fully formed during this stage, the subsequent trajectory of the case remains unclear.Whether the party will be released on bail or formally arrested will become clear within these 37 days.
So, during these 37 days, how should the party respond, and what assistance is needed?
Author of this article | Attorney Shao Shiwei
01
The Party Needs to Enhance Their Coping Abilities
Over the years, Attorney Shao has met with hundreds of parties in detention centers across various regions, ranging from influential business owners to ordinary workers. Many break down in tears in my presence.
Anxiety and breakdowns are common due to the sudden change in environment. With their minds in disarray, they become nervous and panicked, and some parties even struggle to engage in complete and coherent dialogue.
In such special circumstances, some parties believe that "unconditional cooperation," "gaining trust," "requesting forgiveness," or "eliciting sympathy" will lead to favorable outcomes. However, this naive notion is often disadvantageous because investigators have their own professional stance.
Therefore, it is crucial to engage a lawyer for a meeting immediately. At this point, someone needs to advise them on how to face the situation and handle it.
First, the party needs a lawyer to provide psychological counseling based on experience, helping them return to a normal state of mind so that their actions serve the purpose of resolving the issue;
Second, lacking sufficient experience, the party is prone to pitfalls and requires professional guidance from a lawyer to enhance their coping abilities.
Through communication with the lawyer, the party can gain an objective understanding of their case. Some parties subconsciously immerse themselves in endless fear and anxiety. Prolonged exposure to such states can lead to physical and psychological collapse.
Criminal cases are protracted battles. According to standard procedures, a case typically takes about six months from investigation to judgment. If the party remains in custody for an extended period, they need a positive mindset and good physical condition to withstand multiple rounds of interrogations by public security, procuratorial, and judicial personnel. Therefore, during this period, meetings and communications with the lawyer act asa powerful booster, continuously instilling confidence in the party.
What Causes the Party's Fear?？On one side, investigators aim to complete their tasks and solve the case as soon as possible; on the other, the party, driven by fear, is unsure of what to say and what not to say. When impatient investigators encounter hesitant parties, conflict is imminent.
Not everyone possesses immense stress resilience.
02
The Party Needs to Possess Certain Legal Knowledge
-
Always Review the Content Before Signing the Interrogation Record!
A significant number of parties sign interrogation records conducted by public security organs without reviewing the content.However, this creates endless risks for subsequent criminal defense efforts.
Each time I meet with parties involved in new cases and inquire about the facts, I always ask: "Is this also what is written in your interrogation record?" The responses I typically receive are as follows—
Probably?
I didn't pay attention.
I'm not sure; I don't remember.
The investigator urged me to sign quickly, so I did.
Should the interrogation record be reviewed?
In criminal cases, procuratorates and courts primarily rely on written reviews, andinterrogation records are one of the important bases for judicial organs to determine conviction and sentencing,especially when documentary evidence, physical evidence, witness testimonies, and other forms of evidence are lacking, making the suspect's own confession particularly crucial.
The facts of the case as perceived by investigators = The content recorded in the interrogation record
The facts of the case as perceived by investigators ≠ What you believe but is not recorded in the interrogation record
A lawyer's defense work is also built upon the party's statements in the interrogation record and related evidence. If the party is truly innocent, or if the evidence proving guilt is insufficient, but the interrogation record places the party in a disadvantageous position, the lawyer's defense and representation efforts will be significantly hindered.
-
Take Responsibility for Your Statements
During the creation of interrogation records, answering investigators' questions based solely on naive perceptions and ingrained communication habits may lead to adverse consequences.
Regarding facts that should be truthfully stated, if the party consistently conceals or evades, they may lose the opportunity to be recognized for voluntary surrender, thereby forfeiting the chance for lenient punishment. Regarding situations that should not be elaborated upon, if we speak recklessly based on our own ideas, we may place ourselves in a disadvantageous position, affecting subsequent defense efforts.
As a senior lawyer deeply specialized in the criminal field, Attorney Shao has consulted with over a thousand parties and handled hundreds of cases over the years. Whether a party is telling the truth can often be discerned within a few exchanges, let alone by the investigating officers whose daily routine involves interrogating suspects.
Some parties, based on their naive understanding, believe that if they remain silent, the investigators cannot possibly know the truth; others participated only minimally in the case, with most actions undertaken by others, leaving them unaware of the full picture; while others deliberately avoid serious issues to downplay their involvement, attempting to clear themselves of suspicion...
In cases involving co-defendants, even if you remain silent, will others speak? If others have largely confessed to the basic facts, could your silence affect the final conviction and sentencing?
If the party arbitrarily "speaks recklessly" or expresses their understanding and views without legal basis while unclear about the nature of the case, they may place themselves in a disadvantageous position.
Previously, I met with an employee involved in a criminal case concerning a loan facilitation company. He said, "Attorney Shao, I believe our company did not defraud clients; at most, we engaged in predatory lending practices. I told the investigating officer the same last time. Is that okay?" Me: ...
In a previous fraud case, normally, the party should have been released within 37 days, with no subsequent criminal liability. However, after the family engaged my services during the procuratorial stage, a review of the case file revealed that during the investigation phase, when giving his statement, he had retold the incident according to his own understanding, essentially creating a new story!?
This directly resulted in a one-year sentence for a case that was originally devoid of guilt.
Through meetings, lawyers provide litigation guidance to parties, helping them conduct an objective and comprehensive analysis of the case and informing them how to protect their legitimate rights and interests. This is extremely important.
03
Strive to Seek Facts Supporting Innocence or Lesser Crimes
The "Golden 37 Days" in criminal cases can be broken down into 30 days of criminal detention and 7 days for public security organs to request approval for arrest from the procuratorate.In practice, when approving whether to arrest a suspect, the procuratorate does not necessarily interrogate the party to verify case details; many reviews are conducted based on written materials.。
In such scenarios, there is information asymmetry between the procuratorate and public security organs. Public security investigations and interrogation records primarily document facts unfavorable to the party. The procuratorate must approve the arrest within a short span of 7 days. If it only absorbs information from the public security side (that arrest is warranted) without receiving information from the lawyer's side (why arrest should not be granted? What facts and evidence prove the party's innocence or lesser culpability?), thenobjectively, the likelihood of arrest increases.
Attorney Shao previously represented a rape case where the party was a factory owner. Through meetings and inquiries, it was learned that the reporting woman was his long-term mistress. She reported the case because she requested an increase in living expenses, which the man refused. Following an unpleasant conversation, she filed the report. On the second day of the party's criminal detention, this attorney urgently met with him and learned that neither the special relationship between the parties nor the reason for the woman's report was reflected in the interrogation record.
With the cooperation of the family, we collected evidence from the victim and presented relevant evidence to the prosecutor, restoring a complete and objective picture of the facts for the prosecutor. Faced with our evidence, the victim could not justify her claims. Ultimately, the prosecutor decided not to approve the arrest due to insufficient evidence, and after some time, the public security organ withdrew the case.
If, in this case, the prosecutor had only reviewed the existing interrogation records of the victim and suspect, they could have fully decided to arrest the party. Once arrested, it becomes much more difficult to withdraw the case or decide against prosecution. Because arresting the wrong person and mishandling the case allows the party to apply for state compensation,once an arrest is made, judicial organs will strive by all means to convict the party—this was stated personally by an investigator.
04
Proactively Advance Case Progress
1. Effective Communication Can Only Be Achieved Within the Same Linguistic Framework
When communicating with investigators, family members must fully consider the role and position of the other party in the case,clearly distinguishing what can be said and what is inappropriate to say.
Many family members are inevitably emotional, but inappropriate expressions may raise the investigators' alertness, preventing the acquisition of effective information during discussions. For example: "When is my family member expected to be released? How much money do you need? You arrested the wrong person; he is innocent..."
Or: "Our family of four relies on his income, with elderly parents and young children to care for. His parents are also ill and need care. He knows his mistake and won't repeat it. Can you please show mercy..." etc. While we understand the family's feelings, this mode of communication does not help advance the case smoothly.
In a previous case handled, the corporate legal representative was arrested. The family asked, "Can I ask the officer to mail me my husband's company seal?" Hearing this, I patiently explained to the family: "The company seal is an item seized in the case. As the case is currently under investigation, it cannot be retrieved temporarily. Furthermore, even if it were permissible, it must be collected and signed for by the individual himself; the investigator cannot assist with mailing it."
From the family's perspective, having such thoughts is certainly ordinary and understandable. However, for investigators, these requests constitute serious violations of regulations. If encountering an irritable investigator, such conversations may leave both parties unhappy.
2. Leave Professional Matters to Professionals
Of course, if the lawyer engaged by the family lacks industry knowledge, ideal communication outcomes cannot be achieved.
Two days ago, during a meeting at a certain detention center, a lawyer ahead of me was preparing to meet with an employee involved in a loan facilitation case. The company's actions were currently characterized as fraud. That lawyer was passionately stating to other lawyers nearby, "I believe there is a significant issue with the public security organ characterizing this case as fraud. I think it should be classified as illegal business operations! They definitely do not have financial loan licenses!"
In reality, loan facilitation companies are loan intermediaries engaged in traffic generation and promotion, not online lending platforms, and thus do not require qualifications related to financial loans.
3. Continuously Seek Breakthroughs in the Dynamic Process
Failure to obtain bail does not determine the final outcome of the case.。Defense strategies include arguing for lesser crimes, minor offenses, non-prosecution due to insufficient evidence, case withdrawal, probation, and more. Striving to achieve the most ideal defense outcome for the party is the shared goal of the lawyer, the party, and the family.
In a previous case of opening a casino handled by Attorney Shao, the party remained in custody at the detention center. Before the court hearing, I communicated with the presiding judge. The judge's reasoning was that if the actual gambling amount was inferred backwards from the defendant's commissions, the defendant should be sentenced to more than five years. Based on practical case-handling experience, the judge's reasoning was not flawed, as many cases are judged similarly. However,as a defense lawyer, I could not accept such an outcome.
Therefore, I continued to communicate with the judge and submitted legal opinions multiple times, constantly "contesting" and arguing strongly on reasonable grounds. Ultimately, we achieved the ideal result of a sentence of only several months of fixed-term imprisonment. The family and the party were very satisfied with our work, stating that it far exceeded their expectations.
05
Concluding Remarks
However, in daily case handling, we observe some families who, lacking legal knowledge, believe their family member is undoubtedly innocent and simply wait for the outcome, only to later receive news of an arrest.
The "Golden Rescue Period" during the investigation stage is a critical phase concerning the party's future and fate. The earlier a lawyer intervenes in the case, the greater the scope for the lawyer to strive for a favorable outcome for the party, making it easier to achieve the ideal defense effect.
We hope this article provides assistance to parties and their families. We also hope that every party can find a professional and reliable lawyer.
