[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, obtaining acquittal relies on evidence review and legal element analysis, rather than any form of promise. According to Article 37 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on October 26, 2018), the defense attorney's responsibility is to present materials and opinions based on facts and laws, proving that the suspect or defendant is innocent, guilty of a lesser crime, or that their criminal responsibility should be mitigated or exempted; Article 55 requires emphasizing evidence, conducting thorough investigations and research, and not easily believing confessions; Article 200 clearly stipulates that if the evidence is insufficient to determine the defendant's guilt, a not-guilty verdict should be rendered due to insufficient evidence and the charges cannot be established. The lawyer's work process includes: reviewing whether the behavior meets the threshold for criminalization, whether the subjective knowledge and objective behavior can be proven, whether the evidence chain is complete, and whether the evidence collection process is legal. It is advisable to intervene as early as possible in the investigation stage to fix favorable evidence. For more details, please refer to the following link:Criminal defense and criminal case filing services.

I. Problem Background and Typical Scenarios

When the defendant insists on his innocence but is constantly prosecuted, it is the most challenging scenario for criminal defense. Typical situations include: being presumed to have known about the transaction abnormalities (such as cases involving the purchase of illicit goods or assisting in information network crime activities); the confession being repeatedly changed under pressure and being used as the main evidence for conviction; the crime amount being mixed with legal parts; and the evidence chain relying on indirect evidence but lacking a crucial link. The reality of innocent defense is that the proportion of courts directly declaring acquittal is not high, but a large number of "substantial acquittals" occur in the pre-trial stage - cases being withdrawn during the investigation stage, cases not being approved for arrest during the review of the arrest warrant, and cases not being prosecuted during the review of the indictment. Therefore, professional defense should not only be exerted during the trial, but also strive to find exculpatory evidence at every procedural node from the first meeting. The evidence collection and fact analysis involved in such cases can be combined with the following aspects:Special services and other case servicesObtain support.

II. Key points of contention

The controversy and difficulties of the defense of innocence focus on four aspects. Firstly, the substantive elements: whether the behavior meets all the constitutive elements of the crime, and whether the threshold of the amount or quantity of the crime is reached, which is the primary review point. If the threshold is not reached, it does not constitute a crime. Secondly, the standard of evidence: according to Article 55 of the Criminal Procedure Law, the conviction must be based on reliable and sufficient evidence and exclude reasonable doubt. Single evidence cannot be used to convict, and contradictory statements and the lack of key physical evidence and appraisals may shake the foundation of the conviction. Thirdly, the legality of evidence collection: according to Article 56, confessions collected by illegal methods such as extorting confessions by torture should be excluded, and evidence obtained by illegal methods such as threats, inducements, and deception shall not be used as the basis for conviction. The procedural review directly affects the admissibility of evidence. Fourthly, the strategic tension: there is a tension between the defense of innocence and the plea bargain. Whether to insist on innocence and when to adjust the strategy should be based on the evaluation of evidence rather than emotions, and the decision should be made in accordance with the law after fully communicating with the client.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

Case One (Review of the Criminal Threshold Leads to an Acquittal): In May 2026, C* was criminally detained by the Haidian Branch of the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau on suspicion of disseminating obscene materials after reposting three obscene videos on a forum. The posts were viewed approximately 5,000 times and downloaded about 1,000 times, but C* did not profit from them. After Henglu Law Firm conducted a review and verification, it focused on the core issue that "the number of videos involved was far below the legal threshold for criminal prosecution". According to relevant judicial interpretations, non-profit dissemination of obscene videos requires more than 40 videos to be convicted and punished. In this case, there were only three videos, less than one-tenth of the legal threshold, so C* should not be considered a criminal. Based on this, combined with C*'s voluntary surrender, admission of guilt, and proof of no social danger, the lawyer submitted a "Legal Opinion on Bail Pending Trial" to the case-handling authority. On June 24, 2026, the Haidian Branch decided to grant bail to C* in accordance with Article 67 Paragraph 1 Item 2 of the Criminal Procedure Law, achieving a phased result of substantially acquitting C*. This case was handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Shang JiangpengAttorney (practice certificate number: 11101202310580738, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ) acting as an agent.

Case 2 (the possibility of exoneration in pre-trial procedures): On July 15, 2025, Liu Gang was detained on suspicion of fraud. He had a child under one year old at home who needed care. Henglue Law Firm met with him several times to verify that he was a first-time offender. The firm coordinated with his family to fully refund the illegal proceeds and obtained a written apology from the victim. The firm submitted a request to the procuratorial organ not to approve the arrest based on factors such as Liu's confession of guilt, voluntary admission of guilt, lack of social danger, and the need to care for the child. The procuratorial organ accepted the request and decided not to approve the arrest and instead changed the measure of restraint to bail pending trial. This case demonstrates that the pre-trial fixation of evidence and circumstances directly affects the direction of coercive measures and the subsequent procedural space. The case was handled by Beijing Henglue Law Firm.Yuan HangAttorney (practice certificate number: 11101202110286151, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ) acting as the agent.

The two cases jointly illustrate that the first step in securing acquittal is to accurately identify the "non-constituting a crime" or "insufficient evidence" pivot points—including the criminal threshold, subjective knowledge, evidence chain, and evidence-gathering procedures—and then use procedural tools such as bail applications, legal opinions, and arguments against arrest to translate this pivot point into actual results.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

Main legal basis: Article 37 (Duties of Defense Counsel), Article 55 (Rules on Sufficiency of Evidence and Exclusion of Isolated Evidence), Article 56 (Exclusion of Illegally Obtained Evidence), Article 177 (Decision not to Prosecute Due to Lack of Criminal Facts or Significantly Minor Circumstances), and Article 200 (Acquittal Due to Insufficient Evidence) of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on October 26, 2018). Practical advice: - Engage a defense counsel as early as possible and systematically fix exculpatory evidence, including transaction records, original communication media, and witness leads. - Apply for the exclusion of illegally obtained evidence and preserve evidence timely. - Focus on demonstrating the conditions for returning the case for supplementary investigation and deciding not to prosecute during the review of the prosecution. - Organize cross-examinations based on reasonable doubt during the trial. It should be emphasized that any promise to "guarantee acquittal" is unreliable, and the defense strategy should be determined by the evidence situation. For cases involving restitution, recovery of illicit gains, and property disposal, reference can be made to relevant provisions.Creditor-debtor relations and enforcement case services.

5. Henglue Law Firm's Reminder

There are two things that should be avoided in a defense of innocence: First, believing in the rhetoric of "guaranteeing innocence". Any promise that emphasizes the outcome is unreliable; Second, waiting passively. Most evidence of innocence is gathered in the early stages of the case, and delaying action may lead to missed opportunities to fix evidence. At the same time, we should face up to the relationship between the lenient punishment system for pleading guilty and admitting guilt and the defense of innocence: In cases where the evidence is truly sufficient, insisting on innocence may lead to the loss of opportunities for lenient punishment; In cases where the evidence has major flaws, forcing a guilty plea may lead to the loss of opportunities to exonerate oneself. Whether to insist on a defense of innocence should be decided by the lawyer after a comprehensive evaluation of the evidence together with the client. The judicial organs in Beijing have strict standards for evidence, and solid cross-examination and argumentation are always the foundation of a defense of innocence, rather than any promises made outside the courtroom.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: What is the success rate of a not-guilty defense, and will insisting on not being guilty result in a harsher sentence?

The low acquittal rate is an objective reality, but there are indeed opportunities for "substantive acquittal" such as case dismissal, refusal to approve arrest, and non-prosecution, especially in cases that do not meet the threshold for conviction or lack sufficient evidence. Under Chinese law, there is no punishment for pleading not guilty, and pleading guilty and accepting the punishment is an independent procedural choice. The defense strategy should be determined by the evidence situation, rather than by the fear of a heavy sentence. Lawyers will first conduct an evidence evaluation: if it is indeed not guilty or there are major flaws in the evidence, insisting on acquittal is the exercise of a legitimate right; otherwise, they should rationally adjust their strategies and strive for a lenient outcome.

Q2: To determine whether it's possible to secure an acquittal, what evidence needs to be reviewed?

There are four layers of review: First, physical evidence—whether the quantity, number, and amount meet the criminal threshold, and whether it is mixed with legal funds; Second, subjective evidence—whether there is objective basis for determining knowledge and intent, and it cannot be inferred solely based on confessions; Third, evidence chain—whether key links such as the flow of funds, the source of items, and the time and location of the acts are supported by original evidence, and whether isolated evidence can be corroborated; Fourth, procedural evidence—whether the interrogation audio and video, the signing time of the transcripts, and the legality of the evidence collection subjects and procedures. Original carriers such as mobile phones, computers, and account transaction records should be fixed as soon as possible, as it is difficult to supplement the evidence after their loss.

Q3: Are the attorney fees for a not-guilty defense particularly high?

The defense of innocence requires lawyers to invest a lot of time and effort, including multiple meetings, detailed review of case files, extensive document preparation, and courtroom preparation. The fees for this type of defense are usually higher than those for general defenses, and are often charged on a per-stage or hourly basis, subject to the terms of the contract. According to relevant regulations, criminal cases are not allowed to use contingency fee arrangements. It is recommended to rationally plan the investment: first, entrust a lawyer to conduct a comprehensive evidence evaluation of the case to determine whether there is any possibility of acquitting the defendant or finding evidence to incriminate him/her, and then decide whether to persist in the defense of innocence throughout the entire process. This is a more cost-effective and more reliable approach to decision-making.

Q4: How long does it typically take for a not-guilty case to proceed from the defense stage to the final verdict?

The duration of the process depends on the stage of the procedure and its complexity: in the investigation stage, if the goal is to have the case dismissed or not approved for arrest, the critical window is around the review period for approval of arrest, which is about fourteen days after criminal detention; in the review and prosecution stage, if the goal is to seek a non-prosecution decision, it is generally within one to several months; after entering the trial, the first-instance ordinary procedure is concluded within two to three months, and the complex cases can be extended according to law. According to Article 200 of the Criminal Procedure Law, a not-guilty verdict due to insufficient evidence must be made after a full hearing. Overall, the probability and speed of resolving cases in the pre-trial stage are higher, which is why it is emphasized to intervene as early as possible in the investigation stage.

Q5: What should the parties involved and their families do now?

Five-step advice: First, immediately hire a lawyer to meet with the client, verify the facts of the accusations and the statements, and assess whether there is any possibility of acquittal; Second, comprehensively preserve the original evidence, including communication records, transaction records, contract documents, and device data, and never delete accounts or clear data; Third, have the lawyer submit legal opinions to the investigating authorities, providing written arguments on the threshold of criminal conviction and evidence deficiencies; Fourth, promptly apply for the exclusion of illegal evidence such as torture for confessions and leave a record of the process; Fifth, maintain rational communication, do not collude in giving false statements, do not privately contact investigators, and raise all claims through legal procedures.

This article is written based on the common judicial interpretation in the Beijing area. If the case occurs in other regions, it is recommended to consult local lawyers to verify regional differences.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Criminal defense legal services·Attorney Yuan Hang·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and open adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If you encounter disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.