华为刑事审判9月开庭！孟晚舟留下的事实承认，会成为华为最危险的证据吗？美国联邦法院深度解析- Vivien律师

Huawei is about to face criminal trial in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, and a recent evidentiary ruling by the U.S. federal court has once again placed Meng Wanzhou at the center of the case. In June 2026, a federal judge ruled that the Statement of Facts signed by Meng Wanzhou in the 2021 Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) can be used as evidence against Huawei in the upcoming jury trial. This means that although Meng Wanzhou has withdrawn her personal criminal charges and is not required to testify, the statement of facts she signed may still play a significant role in Huawei's criminal case. This video will analyze the following in detail from the perspective of US federal criminal procedure and evidence law: • The development process and latest procedural progress of the Huawei criminal case; • Why Meng Wanzhou did not plead guilty, and why her signed statement of facts may still be admissible as evidence; • How the US Federal Rules of Evidence handle statements by company executives; • What are the main criminal charges Huawei faces; • What legal consequences will Huawei face if ultimately found guilty by a jury; • How the Alternative Fines Act may affect the final fine; • Will a criminal conviction change Huawei's future legal and compliance risks in its global business system? This video aims to help viewers understand how the US federal criminal justice system handles multinational corporate criminal cases, and the relationship between corporate criminal liability, rules of evidence, and corporate governance. If you enjoy this channel's rigorous, in-depth, and law-centric analysis, please subscribe, like, and turn on notifications. 【Disclaimer】 This video is for legal knowledge, judicial system, and public event analysis only, and does not constitute any legal advice or factual determination against any individual or institution. The cases depicted in this video are based on publicly available court documents, trial transcripts, and official materials. The cases are still in the judicial process, and all criminal charges are charges only; they should not be considered grounds for any defendant to have committed a crime unless a final judgment is rendered by a court according to law. For specific legal issues, please consult a licensed lawyer and obtain professional legal advice based on the specific facts of your case. 【Copyright Statement】 This video is the exclusive property of this channel. Without written authorization, no individual or organization may copy, reproduce, edit, re-upload, re-dub, mirror, or use it for any commercial purpose. Sharing the link to this video is welcome, but please do not reproduce the video content without authorization. Huawei is scheduled to stand trial in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, and a recent federal evidentiary ruling has once again placed Meng Wanzhou at the center of the case. In June 2026, the federal court ruled that the Statement of Facts signed by Meng Wanzhou as part of her 2021 Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) may be introduced as evidence against Huawei during the upcoming criminal trial. Although the charges against Ms. Meng were dismissed after she fulfilled the terms of the DPA, the factual admissions contained in that agreement may still play a significant role in the prosecution of Huawei. In this video, we examine: • The procedural history of the Huawei criminal case; • Why Meng Wanzhou's factual admissions may be admissible despite the absence of a guilty plea; • How the Federal Rules of Evidence treat statements made by corporate officers; • The principal criminal charges against Huawei; • The potential legal consequences if Huawei is convicted; • The possible application of the Alternative Fines Act (18 U.S.C. § 3571(d)); • The broader implications for multinational corporations operating in the global marketplace. This video is intended to explain the legal issues involved in the case from the perspective of U.S. federal criminal law and does not advocate for any party. Disclaimer: This video is provided solely for educational, informational, and public-interest purposes. It does not constitute legal advice or establish the guilt or liability of any individual or organization. All discussions are based on publicly available court records, judicial opinions, and official sources. Criminal charges remain allegations unless and until proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. For legal advice regarding a specific matter, please consult a qualified attorney. Copyright Notice-© All Rights Reserved. No part of this video may be copied, reproduced, redistributed, re-uploaded, translated, dubbed, or otherwise used without prior written permission. Sharing the original YouTube link is encouraged.