The first aspect: motivation.
In this case, the explanation about the motive of committing the crime is that two murdered children smashed the earth wall of Zhang Yuhua's house, and Zhang Yuhuan beat them. Among them, Zhang Lei scratched Zhang Yuhuan's hand, so Zhang Yuhuan killed him in a rage.
This kind of trivial dispute can be said to be too common in rural areas. Killing two children in broad daylight for this matter is a bit incredible. At this point, the suspicion motive is not established.
The second aspect: details of the crime.
Crime scene: No relevant direct evidence was found in the first crime scene for such a major case. Time of committing the crime: Zhang Yuhuan said that the time of committing the crime was 1 1, that is, the time when the victim died. At this time, many children in the village claimed to have seen two victims. Tools for committing crimes: hemp rope, sacks. There are no clues such as fingerprints, blood and DNA skin tissue on such important evidence, but it is designated as a crime tool just because the components are consistent, and the rope that Zhang Yuhua confessed is different from his family's, so such important evidence will not be saved. Zhang Yuhua's hand injury: As the direct motive of the crime, Zhang Yuhua's DNA was not found in the victim's fingernails. Generally speaking, three of the five pieces of evidence mentioned in the case at that time were directly based on Zhang Yuhua's confession, which was obviously unreasonable.
The third aspect: the interrogation process.
1. During the trial, Zhang Yuhuan claimed that he was tortured to extract a confession. Although there is no direct evidence for this statement, judging from Zhang Yuhuan's later conviction, there are still some doubts.
In such a criminal homicide case, no professional lawyer defended Zhang Yuhua at the final trial. In this regard, the trial procedure has been violated and it is also doubtful.
Please leave a message in the comments section if you have other explanations for the above views.