During the on-site investigation, the investigation organ extracted 150 items from Dingjia kitchen, including boiled fish, spices, pots and pans, etc. Even the dust on the ground is swept up and sent for testing. However, out of more than 50 excerpts from/kloc-0, only 5 were recorded in the register:
(1) Ding Yunxiao's dormitory spits 1 serving;
(2) An iron pot on the shrimp cooker;
(3) pressure cooker beside the stove;
(4) Aluminum pot (original pot) for boiling water on coal stove;
(5) There is a doorknob outside Nianbin grocery store, which leads to the patio of Chen Yanjiao's house. From July 28th to August 9th, 2006, it was entrusted to Fuzhou Public Security Bureau for inspection. The physical and chemical inspection report is as follows: Fuzhou Public Security Bureau.
Physical and chemical inspection reports, inspection materials and
Packaging inspection purpose inspection result entrustment
Time report
Does Pan Yu's vomit 100g contain rodenticide? After inspection, fluoroacetic acid rodenticide was detected in the vomit of Pan Yu. July 28th, 2006 August, 2006 1, did the doorknob extracted from Nianbin's door leading to Dingyun Shrimp Kitchen contain rat poison? After inspection, compared with the standard fluoroacetic acid derivative secondary mass spectrometry, the residue extracted from the door handle has main ion fragments, which tends to confirm that the residue on the door handle contains fluoroacetic acid. Jul. 3, 2006 1 Aug. 20061Is there rodenticide in the iron pan on Dingyun shrimp stove? After inspection, fluoroacetic acid rodenticide was detected in the residue in the iron pan on Dingyun shrimp furnace. August 20061August 6, 2006 Does Dingyun shrimp pot pressure cooker (Ningbo Jilin Dongfang Aluminum Products Factory) contain rodenticide? After inspection, fluoroacetate was detected in the residue in the pressure cooker near Dingyun shrimp stove. August 9, 2006 August 20061/KOOC-0/Ronggong Criminal Technology (2006) Does aluminum pot 3500ml water boiling on the briquette furnace beside the No.576 staircase contain rodenticide? Fluoroacetic acid rodenticide was detected in the water in the aluminum pot boiled on the briquette stove beside the stairs. On August 9, 2006, August 2008 1 1, and February 6, 2007, Fuzhou City Procuratorate filed a public prosecution with Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court for Nian Bin's crime of throwing dangerous substances, accusing Nian Bin of the following crimes: On July 26, 2006, the defendant Nian Bin saw Ding luring customers in his grocery store and became resentful, and the next morning/. The remaining half a pack of rodenticide and mineral water bottles containing rodenticide were discarded in a nearby bamboo basket. In the afternoon, Chen Yanjiao helped Ding Yun shrimp to boil squid with aluminum pot, and at night Ding Yun shrimp cooked porridge with aluminum pot. That night, the victim, Yu Yue, Yu Han, Ding, Chen Yanjiao, Nian Chiu and squid were poisoned one after another. Among them, Pan Yu and Yu Yue died after being rescued. After forensic examination by Fuzhou Public Security Bureau, Pan Yu and Yu Yue were found to be poisoned by fluoroacetic acid rodenticide in their blood and urine. Fluoroacetate was detected in water, pressure cooker residue and iron pot residue of Dingyun shrimp aluminum pot.
During the trial, Nian Bin complained in court that he didn't do anything about poisoning, and the confession during the pre-trial was caused by the police extorting a confession by torture. On February 1 2008, Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court sentenced Nian Bin to death and deprived him of his political rights for life for the crime of releasing dangerous substances. Nian Bin appealed against the verdict.
On June 5438+February 18, 2008, Fujian Provincial High Court sent the case back to Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court for retrial on the grounds of "unclear facts and insufficient evidence".
On June 8, 2009, Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court again sentenced Nian Bin to death and deprived him of his political rights for life for the crime of releasing dangerous substances. Nian Bin refused to accept the appeal again.
20 10 On April 7th, Fujian Provincial High Court made a final ruling, dismissed the appeal and upheld the original judgment. The case was reported to the Supreme People's Court for death penalty review according to law.
On October 28th, 20 10/kloc-0, the Supreme Court ruled that the facts of the defendant Nian Bin's crime of releasing dangerous substances were unclear and the evidence was insufficient, so it decided not to approve the ruling of Fujian Provincial High Court to uphold the death penalty, revoked the ruling of Fujian Provincial High Court to uphold the death penalty, and sent the case back to Fujian Provincial High Court for retrial.
On may 5, 20 1 1, the Fujian provincial high court also revoked the death sentence of nian bin by Fuzhou intermediate people's court, and the case was sent back to Fuzhou intermediate people's court for retrial.
On September 7, 20 1 1, the case was heard again in Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court. In the absence of new facts and evidence, the Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court again sentenced Nian Bin to death and deprived him of political rights for life on124 of the same year. On August 22, 20 14, the Fujian Higher People's Court made a final judgment: 1. The criminal incidental civil judgment of Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court (20 1 1) was revoked. Second, the appellant Nian Bin is not guilty. Three. The appellant Nianbin does not bear civil liability for compensation.
2065438+September 2004, Pingtan County Public Security Bureau filed a new case for investigation of Nianbin's poisoning case. 165438+ 10, Nian Bin was refused a passport twice because he was a "criminal suspect".
20165438+1October 25th,165438+1October 65438+/October 24th,165438+/kloc- According to the entry-exit administration, on February 7th, 20 15, Pingtan County, Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court announced that it had made a state compensation decision on the compensation case in which the claimant Nian Bin was acquitted in the second instance, and decided to pay the claimant Nian Bin 589,000 yuan for personal freedom damage and 550,000 yuan for mental damage, all of which were 1 13.
The relevant person in charge of Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court said that Nian Bin and his entrusted agent failed to receive the state compensation decision in accordance with the notice of Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court on June 5438+06, and the court decided to mail the state compensation decision.
On 20 14 12, Nian Bin, who was acquitted, filed an application for state compensation with Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court, asking the court to apologize to the petitioner in the media to eliminate the influence; As well as compensation for infringement of personal freedom, medical expenses, follow-up treatment expenses, disability compensation, living expenses of dependents, mental damage compensation, eight-year grievances, etc. * * * Total exceeds150,000 yuan.
In an interview, Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court pointed out that after receiving Nian Bin's application, it filed a case on February 29th, 20 14, and on February 25th, 20 15, it listened to the opinions of Nian Bin's entrusted agent and his sister Nian Jianlan, and made the above-mentioned state compensation decision according to law. On the morning of March 18, 2065438, the French evening reporter learned from Nian Jianlan, Nian Bin's sister, that Sun, Nian Bin's attorney, would submit the state compensation reconsideration of Nian Bin's case to Fujian High Court this afternoon because she refused to accept the decision of1130,000 made by Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court.
Sun, Nian Bin's attorney, said in an interview with the reporter of Legal Evening News that she had arrived in Fuzhou and would go to Fujian High Court in the afternoon to submit a reconsideration of state compensation. There is no objection to the compensation decision of Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court. Except for personal freedom compensation, other items including medical expenses, lost time, spiritual comfort and disability compensation should be applied for reconsideration.
Gong said that according to the law, the Higher People's Court of Fujian Province must generally give a reply within three months after accepting the reconsideration of compensation, and it can be extended to six months under special circumstances. On June 3, 20 15, Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court made a state compensation decision according to the compensation standard for infringement of citizens' personal freedom published by the Supreme People's Court in 20 15, and made a notice (20 14) No.3-1and decided to pay the difference of 55,872.08 yuan in compensation for Nian Bin's restricted personal freedom. Nian Bin refused to accept the compensation decision of Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court and submitted a national compensation application to Fujian High Court through an attorney.
65438+On February 25th, the Higher People's Court of Fujian Province made a state compensation decision in the second instance of Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court on the case that Nian Bin, the compensation claimant, applied for state compensation, and decided to maintain the state compensation decision No.3 made by Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court (20 14).
65438+On February 30th, the Higher People's Court of Fujian Province issued a document saying that it decided to maintain the state compensation decision of Nianbin case made by Fujian Intermediate People's Court and mail the state compensation decision to itself.