Media store side evidence, you can not restore the price of fish truth – Sohu

Media: store side evidence, you can not restore the "price of fish" truth – Sohu news view because there is no contact with the consumer Chen, the current evidence is incomplete. If the parties to litigation, it should not be in advance. Harbin’s high price fish has made a preliminary statement. According to the "Heilongjiang morning news" WeChat February 15th evening news release, the special investigation team of Harbin Songbei, because consumers failed to contact Mr. Chen, currently only on someone’s Hotel (north Wild Village) for evidence, the preliminary findings are: Square Hotel price tag, Mr. Chen was on price without objection; price regulation which price belongs to the "price law" provisions of the market, so 398 yuan Jin is not illegal; the police did not enforce the law in a civilized place. In addition, the notification also stressed that Mr. Chen thanked the police out of the police, after Chen and the person in charge of the hotel to embrace reconciliation, leave each contact phone, WeChat etc.". Many people think that the plot has reversed, but the event is so true? It should be seen, because there is no contact with the consumer Mr. Chen, the current evidence is incomplete. First listen to both sides, if it is not in advance. But since the current preliminary conclusion depends on the evidence of the store, then its credibility will be able to withstand scrutiny. Unfortunately, from the unilateral evidence of the store, it is impossible to restore the whole truth of the "high price fish". At present, the "Heilongjiang morning news" the WeChat announced a video interview with the store, the information given more "rich", the shop said: Mr. Chen had "drunkenness", the local police to put people off (because it is Mr. Chen their first hit, "the waiter) is the boss of affection". The last of the 10 thousand yuan discount to 7000 yuan settlement price. In other words, the store admits: there were violent clashes between the two sides. This is also in line with Mr. Chen’s previous online photo of injury and "police arrest". But the beatings were not mentioned in the official preliminary findings. Either the investigation team avoided this, or the store was lying. The main evidence of the current investigation is dependent on the shop. So, I hope the investigation group to follow the time, doubts. In addition, even if the price tag, the high price is also suspected of cheating, even if not directly is not illegal, integrity management, law enforcement agencies need to promptly investigate and correct. In fact, "public comment" and other APP, consumers have a lot of bad comments on this store: "tour guide recommended, too expensive, on the pit to travel."." The place that was pulled by the driver. The price of super expensive, cheating! Image of Harbin." This store seems to have a lot of problems. At that time, Mr. Chen was brought into the hotel by the tour guide, "escaped monk, can not escape the temple", the law enforcement department to find a tour guide to confront, it should not be difficult. In addition, the Beijing News reporter has contacted the consumer Mr. Chen, why the local law enforcement departments can not contact? It’s worth questioning. I hope the local law enforcement agencies will do solid work, find consumers and guides, do forensics, find out the truth. Xu Mingxuan (legal worker)

媒体:店家单方证据,无法还原“天价鱼”真相-搜狐新闻  视点   因为没有联系到消费者陈先生,目前的证据是不完整的。讼听两造,偏信则暗,此事还不宜提前下定论。   闹得沸沸扬扬的哈尔滨天价鱼,有了初步的说法。据《黑龙江晨报》微信公号2月15日晚间发布的消息,哈尔滨松北区的专项调查小组,因未能联系到消费者陈先生,目前只能对涉事饭店(北岸野生渔村)方面进行取证,初步调查结果是:饭店方明码标价,当时陈先生对价格无异议;鳇鱼价格属于《价格法》规定的市场调节价格,因此398元 斤不算违规;警察没有不文明执法的地方。此外,通报还强调,陈先生对警察的出警表示感谢,事后“陈某与饭店负责人拥抱和解、互留微信、电话等联系方式”。不少人认为剧情已经反转,但事件就这么真相大白了吗?   应该看到,因为没有联系到消费者陈先生,目前的证据是不完整的。讼听两造,偏信则暗,还不宜提前下定论。但既然目前的初步结论依赖于店家的证据,那么其诚信度就得经得起推敲。遗憾的是,从店家单方面的证据来看,还无法还原“天价鱼”的全部真相。   目前,《黑龙江晨报》的微信公号公布了店方接受采访的视频,给出的信息更“丰富”,店方称:是陈先生他们当时“醉酒闹事”,当地警方要把人带走(因为是陈先生他们先打的服务员),是老板“求的情”,最后把1万元餐费打折成7000多元和解的。也就是说,店家承认:当时双方有暴力冲突。这也与之前陈先生网上晒受伤的照片和“警方要拘人”的说法,有合拍的地方。但是,打人的事在官方的初步调查结论里并没有提到。要么是调查组回避了这个事,要么是店家在撒谎。而目前调查的主要证据是依赖于店方的。所以,希望调查组能及时跟进、释疑。   此外,就算明码标价,畸高的价格也同样有宰客之嫌,哪怕不直接违法,也不是诚信经营,需要执法部门及时调查纠正。事实上,“大众点评”等APP上,消费者对这家店有很多差评:“导游推荐的,太贵了,就坑去旅游的。”“被司机拉去的地方。价格超贵,宰客!拉低哈尔滨形象。”这家店看来问题不少。   当时,陈先生是被导游带进饭店的,“逃得了和尚,逃不了庙”,执法部门找到导游来对质,应该不是难事。况且,新京报记者已经联系上了消费者陈先生,为何当地执法部门联系不上?这值得追问。希望当地执法部门将工作做扎实,找到消费者和导游,做到多方取证,查清真相。   徐明轩(法律工作者)相关的主题文章: