The case of Rao Rongzhi is not that it has been "unconvinced" for a long time. In fact, as early as September last year, the death penalty was issued in the first instance. The reason why the death penalty was not executed was because Rao Rongzhi used the "hidden rules" of the law to appeal and encountered force majeure before the second trial. The resumption of the second trial was delayed for nearly a year. The first-instance verdict was sentenced to death and will be executed immediately
On December 22, 2020, the first-instance verdict was concluded and the verdict was announced at a later date. The reason why the judgment will be pronounced on a certain date instead of in court or on schedule is that firstly, it may be due to the complexity of the case and the uncertainty in the sentencing, which requires a court hearing before deliberation; secondly, if the judgment is pronounced in court or on schedule, in accordance with the requirements of the Procedural Law The judgment needs to be delivered within 10 days or delivered immediately. The time is tight, the task is heavy, and time is too late.
On September 9, 2021, the first instance trial was held again, and this time the results of the first instance verdict were also announced: Rao Rongzhi was sentenced to death immediately for committing intentional homicide, kidnapping, and robbery. implement. At this time, nearly two years had passed since her fall.
Although the first instance made a verdict of immediate execution of the death penalty, this does not mean that the next step will be to enter the "execution" stage. Due to the "two-instance final trial system" stipulated in our country's laws, the defendant will not be satisfied with the outcome of the first-instance judgment. If you are dissatisfied, you can appeal. This is the defendant's right.
Luo Rongzhi appeals against the first-instance judgment. This is the right of the defendant.
Luo Rongzhi appealed, second instance
In fact, Luo Rongzhi expressed dissatisfaction and filed an appeal, believing that he was a victim and was "coerced and threatened" by Faziying. No matter what the reason for Rao Shushi's appeal was, or why she was dissatisfied with the first-instance verdict, according to laws and regulations, as long as she appealed, there would be a second instance, and she would not be immediately thrown into death row.
On September 27, 2021, Rao Rongzhi’s appeal was officially filed, and the second-instance court was heard by the Jiangxi High Court, the superior court of the first-instance Nanchang Intermediate People’s Court. Before the second trial, Rao Rongzhi's family also changed his defense lawyer from the legal aid lawyer appointed in the first trial to Wu Danhong, a well-known lawyer with outstanding criminal defense capabilities.
If the legal provisions are strictly followed, after the second instance hearing is held, the trial should normally be held within three months, that is, on December 27, 2022 at the latest. But just before the trial started, the second instance trial encountered force majeure. As for what the force majeure was, it was most likely affected by the epidemic.
After the second trial resumed, force majeure was ruled out: On August 18, 2022, Rao Rongzhi walked into the second trial scene of Jiangxi High Court wearing protective clothing and handcuffs. The confrontation between the prosecution and the defense in the second trial was quite fierce. The second trial has ended and the court announced that it will set a date for the verdict.
Summary
Through the above sorting process, it is not difficult to find that it has been nearly two years since Rao Rongzhi was sacked and the first instance issued the verdict of immediate execution of the death penalty. In fact, the verdict has already been announced and does not exist at all. "Judgment has not been made" situation.
In fact, if Rao Rongzhi has no objections after the first-instance verdict and accepts the death sentence, then he will enter the Supreme Court’s death penalty review process. Once the Supreme Court's review result is "approved," then the president of the Supreme Court issues an execution order, and within seven days of execution, the reform-through-labor prisoner must have been killed.
But the reality is that the law gives the defendant the right to appeal. Even if the crime is heinous, the law will not deprive her of this right. This is why the second instance procedure follows.