What is the reason?
First, let's briefly review this case:
The suspect Lu Moumou, a native of Shunhe Township, Jiajiang County, Leshan City, Sichuan Province, dropped out of primary school in the third grade, went out to work at the age of 12, and drifted all the year round. Although he has lived in the village for 40 years, the villagers are not impressed by him because of his introverted personality. However, it was not until he had a conflict with the village cadres that people changed their views on him.
The earliest contradiction originated from a road. Because a road in front of the house occupied the land of Lu's family, it caused his dissatisfaction. He smashed the road with an electric hammer and a steel drill and had a dispute with the village cadres. After the police rushed to the scene, Lu Moumou carried steel to catch up. Finally, he was taken away by the police for obstructing official duties.
Lu moumou claimed many times, and after the claim was unsuccessful, he was resentful and decided to retaliate against the society. Since 20 18, 1 1, has Lu made it at home? Bomb? After that, I got on the No.3 bus on land and quickly detonated it? Bomb? . 17 passengers were injured. Among them, 1 passenger was seriously injured, 1 passenger was slightly injured 1 grade, 7 were slightly injured at grade 2, and the remaining 8 were slightly injured.
Afterwards, Lu Moumou was quickly arrested and sentenced to death; Subsequently, Lu Moumou refused to accept the appeal on the grounds of demanding immediate execution of the death penalty, but the second instance still upheld the original judgment.
What is the reason for the court to uphold the original judgment? I think there are the following points:
1, Lu Moumou is a first-time offender. He actively cooperated with the public security organs during the trial, and his attitude of admitting mistakes was good, which played a great role in the sentencing of judges; 2. There is no death, which is an important factor. Courts without death generally don't give top punishment; 3, the positive influence of defense lawyers, explain the situation from all aspects, and strive for a lighter sentence; 4. In the penalty of the second trial, there is the principle that the defendant will not aggravate the penalty if he appeals to the second trial. In this case, Lu Moumou belonged to the defendant and took the initiative to appeal. The penalty of second instance cannot be aggravated. Unless the public prosecution actively protests, the second trial will generally not aggravate the defendant's punishment. 5. The public prosecution agency has a positive attitude towards handling cases and a good attitude towards admitting mistakes, and this case will not be protested. So in the end, Lu got a reprieve, not an immediate execution.
In my opinion, any punishment by the court must be based on the law, and the court will punish it according to the rules and regulations. It doesn't mean that if you want to go to the death penalty court, you will be sentenced to death, and any institution is no exception. Only if your crime meets the requirements of the death penalty and you have caused trouble to the case handlers in the process of pleading guilty, you will have the opportunity to be executed. If there is no principle of no additional punishment on appeal, it will lead to people who are willing to appeal not to appeal. On the one hand, the right of appeal is to correct mistakes, on the other hand, because the defendant has single-handedly opposed the public power of the state, so he should be allowed the possibility of continuing to appeal in the system. This is to ensure? A chance to plead? , not the result. So regardless of the outcome of the appeal, whether the reasons are sufficient or not, what is the purpose of wasting these judicial resources? What if the judgment of the first instance is really wrong? It's possible.
As a result, Lu Moumou was finally troubled by his guilty attitude and it was difficult to stop.