The public security organs discovered the body on September 4, 1994. They conducted an on-site investigation that day and extracted Lu Li's hair, bones and pants. On September 16 of the same year, the

The public security organs discovered the body on September 4, 1994. They conducted an on-site investigation that day and extracted Lu Li's hair, bones and pants. On September 16 of the same year, the public security organs collected blood stains on the door frame, indoor soil and a white shirt. On September 26 of the same year, the police officially issued the "Autopsy Report." Coincidentally, it was also on this day that Lu Tianhui made his first guilty confession. Regarding what he was wearing on the night of the crime, Lu Tianhui’s confession contained three different versions. But coincidentally, after the police's blood stain identification conclusion came out, Lu Tianhui's confession was stabilized as white shirt. As for the identification of the crime location, it is even more meaningless, because the crime location cannot be confirmed by other evidence, and the police already know the location where the body was buried. Everyone familiar with criminal cases knows that in such cases where evidence is first followed by confessions, if the authenticity, autonomy and legality of the confessions cannot be guaranteed, and if the period is accompanied by torture and accusations, If you induce a confession, then all the evidence chains are artificially created illusions. There are multiple pieces of evidence in form, but in reality there is only isolated evidence, because the evidence corroborating relationship is artificially designed and pieced together. What the parties say depends to a large extent on what the investigators teach. Investigators will induce and guide the parties to make confessions that can be mutually corroborated with the existing evidence based on the evidence they have already obtained. According to Lu Tianke's complaint, he himself was subjected to very cruel torture during the investigation process, and many of his confessions were made according to the investigators' intentions. The court of first instance also requested to find out whether the public security organs used torture to extract confessions.

Of course the public security organs will issue written certification stating that they have investigated in accordance with the law and that no confessions were extracted through torture. But can this self-evident transcript really restore the entire truth of the investigation? Such descriptions of situations often appear in past unjust, false and wrongful cases that have been vindicated. But if there was no torture to extract a confession, and no accusations or accusations to induce a confession, who would admit against his will that he had done nothing? Lu Tianhui was detained on September 16, 1994, and sent to the detention center on October 15 of the same year. During this period, he was detained in the interrogation room of the case handling unit for nearly a month. In that special period, in that special murder case, the public security organs interrogated in accordance with the law, without torture or inducement of confessions. Do you believe it?

Lu Tianhui’s confession is false, but there are actually many clues to be found. For example, there are three different versions of the location where Lu Li was raped. There are also three different opinions about what I wore that night. Regarding the method of killing Lu Li, the initial confession was that he killed him with a knife, but later changed it to smashing him with a cement block. Mr. Lu claimed that his shirt was stained with blood, but no blood was found on the skirt of the deceased Lu Li. Mr. Lu confessed that he committed the crime by moonlight that night, but in fact the moon might not be visible at all that night. Lu Tianhui pulled up seven or eight rice nests with his bare hands. After investigation and inspection, it was impossible to do it. In addition, the data that the bones were extracted by the police during the investigation of the scene were not consistent with Lu Tianhui's data, but the public security organs did not hand over the evidence at the beginning.

Looking at the entire case, without Lu Tianhui’s confession, there would be no evidence to directly prove that Lu Tianhui was the murderer. The procuratorate and the court either did not ask how Lu Tianhui's confession was obtained, or they simply believed the explanation issued by the public security agency. Regarding the contradictions and doubts in Lu Tianye's confession, the procuratorate and the court either did not ask or simply ignored them. Because they only care about the rape and murder content of Lu Tianhui's confession. However, this simple and mechanical head-to-head comparison of confessions cannot restore the true situation of the case at all. A large number of judicial cases have proved that people will make false confessions that are not beneficial to themselves in many cases. The deviation of guilty confessions during the investigation stage is the main culprit that leads to unjust, false and wrongful convictions.

He raped a young girl, intentionally killed someone, refused to plead guilty and repent, but was only sentenced to life imprisonment. This is enough to show that the court also believed that there were major problems with the evidence in this case. Lu Tianhui, who narrowly escaped death, was not grateful and continued to complain about injustice for more than 20 years. Lu Tianhui even posted a couplet on the door of his house: "From now on I am willing to be with ghosts, and in the next life I will not be with ghosts." The horizontal comment is "Humans are worse than ghosts." If it were not for the great injustice, Lu You would not be able to write such a couplet.

Currently, the case has been formally filed for review by the Shaanxi High Court.

Whether the judgment should be changed in a retrial does not depend on whether the complainant can provide sufficient new evidence to prove that the original judgment was wrong, but on whether the original judgment can be concluded based on the original evidence and materials, and whether the original judgment is comprehensively reviewed to see whether it was wrong. The burden of proof in criminal cases does not lie with the defendant, and the burden of proof in appeal cases also does not lie with the complainant. We will continue to represent the complainants in this case, even if it takes years. We will continue to represent complainants even if it takes several years.