Chen Debao's trial replay

On March 7th, 20 12, Chen Debao was placed under residential surveillance on suspicion of accepting bribes. On March 22 of the same year, he was detained in criminal detention. On March 3rd, the same year, Kloc-0 was arrested by Liaoyuan Public Security Bureau and detained in Liaoyuan Detention Center. Since then, Chen Debao's case was handed over by the Commission for Discipline Inspection of the Ministry of Public Security to the Anti-Corruption and Bribery Bureau of the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and the Supreme People's Procuratorate was handed over to the People's Procuratorate of Jilin Province for investigation. Jilin Provincial People's Procuratorate designated Liaoyuan City People's Procuratorate of Jilin Province to handle it.

On October 30th, 2065438+021KLOC-0/0, the investigation by the People's Procuratorate of Liaoyuan City, Jilin Province ended. On the same day, Chen Debao was transferred for examination and prosecution on suspicion of accepting bribes and corruption. During the period of 20 12, 1 10, 15, it was returned for supplementary investigation, and in the same year 12/6, it was transferred for review and prosecution again.

201212 On February 7, the People's Procuratorate of Liaoyuan City, Jilin Province filed a public prosecution with the Intermediate People's Court of Liaoyuan City, Jilin Province. Liaoyuan Intermediate People's Court accepted the case on 20 12, 1 1, and it is scheduled to hold a public hearing at 65438 on February 23rd.

Before the trial, because Yu's testimony could not be justified and Yuan Changsheng's testimony was untrue, defense lawyer Zhao Yunheng applied to the court for a witness to appear in court. At the same time, the lawyer believes that Chen Debao was forced to confess because he thought that the evidence submitted by the investigation organ was illegally obtained, so the lawyer asked the court to start the illegal evidence exclusion procedure.

However, when Liaoyuan Intermediate People's Court heard the case on February 23, 20 12, the court did not respond to these two applications, and the lawyer did not raise any objection. The reasons for it were not known