Lin Senhao, who has entered the review stage of the death penalty in the Supreme People's Court, is suspected of poisoning and causing death, that is, the Fudan poisoning case, and has made new progress. On the morning of 25th, Xie Tongxiang, a defense lawyer entrusted by Lin Senhao, submitted seven applications to the Supreme Court.
On April 20 13, Huang Yang, a graduate student of Shanghai Medical College of Fudan University in Shanghai, died of N- dimethylnitrosamine poisoning after being rescued. Huang Yang's roommate, Lin Senhao, was found to be the murderer, and was sentenced to death and deprived of political rights for life by the Court of Final Appeal for intentional homicide.
The application submitted by Xie Tongxiang requested that Lin Senhao's death penalty review case be heard in public, that Xie Tongxiang's lawyer's opinion be postponed for one and a half months, that Lin Senhao be transferred to a detention center outside Shanghai for custody, that mass spectra of all samples related to Lin Senhao's case be taken from an appraisal institution for cross-examination, that Huang Yang's medical treatment process be appraised for medical malpractice, that Huang Yang's death be re-appraised, and that scientific experiments be conducted.
Why did you change lawyers at the stage of death penalty review and file so many applications? Is it to buy time? CCTV reporter Sun Ying interviewed lawyer Xie Tongxiang today.
Xinhuanet and People's Daily reported "Lin's father changed lawyers in the review stage of death penalty for poisoning cases" (abstract)
Xinhuanet and People's Daily reported that Fu Lin will entrust Xie Tongxiang, a Beijing lawyer and president of China Lawyers Judicial Network, to take over the Lin Senhao case. Xie Tongxiang, in his personal profile of Weibo, calls himself "a professional lawyer of death penalty review in the Supreme People's Court and a death penalty defense lawyer". He is also the chief lawyer of the Supreme People's Court Death Penalty Review Lawyers Network.
According to a person in the field of criminal defense, there are many parts that need lawyers to consult with the Supreme Court in the review stage of death penalty, and the professional requirements for lawyers to be responsible for the overall situation are higher. Therefore, the review stage of death penalty is quite a test of the lawyer's level, and the business is difficult. According to available data, Xie Tongxiang is particularly good at defending criminal cases and reviewing death sentences in the Supreme People's Court. Many cases of intentional homicide he handled were not approved at the review stage of the Supreme Court, and all of them were commuted.
People's Daily reported that Fudan poisoning case will be submitted again to abolish the death penalty (abstract)
People's Daily Online, Beijing, August 12. Recently, the "Fudan poisoning case", which has attracted much media attention, has once again sparked heated discussions. The news that Fu Lin, the father of the defendant Lin Senhao, demanded that Lin Senhao's death penalty not be approved and revoked, and met with the Supreme Court judge for several hours ignited public opinion. Experts said that it is very rare for a judge to see the defendant's family during the review of the death penalty, but the Supreme Court may or may not reply to his opinion. Xie Tongxiang, the attorney of Lin's father, said that Lin's opinions are of great significance to this case, and they will submit the Opinions on Asking the Supreme People's Court not to approve the abolition of the death penalty (II) in the near future.
The Supreme Court judge met Fu Lin's lawyer in court: This is the first case.
Xie Tongxiang, the attorney of Lin's father, told the reporter that on July 28th, after his application and communication, the President of the Criminal Trial Chamber of the Supreme Court agreed to the meeting request between the defendant's father and the presiding judge after asking the leaders for research and careful consideration. In the Criminal Trial Chamber of the Supreme Court, the presiding judge of the Lin Senhao case exchanged some facts with Fu Lin and told Fu Lin that the Supreme Court had sent people to Shanghai for information many times. Lin's father said that the whole meeting lasted several hours, and the judge and the clerk also made detailed notes.
Regarding the meeting between the presiding judge and the defendant's family, lawyer Xie Tongxiang said that he has to handle many death penalty review cases every year, and there has never been a precedent for the presiding judge to meet the defendant's family in criminal court before. "This is the first time that the death penalty review judge directly met with the relatives of the reviewed person in the criminal court to listen to their opinions since the Supreme People's Court took back the right to review the death penalty."
Lawyer Xie Tongxiang believes that the case is very serious and some new situations have emerged. Listening to the opinions of the family members of the parties involved in the death penalty review is conducive to the fair handling of the case. The fact that the presiding judge can meet the family members of the defendant also reflects the Supreme People's Court's highly serious and responsible attitude towards the death penalty review case.
Lawyer Xie also said that he and Lin's father will continue to submit the Opinions on Asking the Supreme People's Court not to approve the abolition of the death penalty (II) in the near future.
The reporter learned from Xie Tongxiang's lawyer that on the afternoon of July 3 1, he and Lin Senhao's father came to the third court of the Criminal Division of the Supreme Court and submitted the Opinions on Requesting the Supreme Court not to approve the revocation of Lin Senhao's death penalty (I) and more than 10 applications related to this case. The judges of the third criminal court of the Supreme Court personally received the materials and issued a list of the materials received with the official seal of the third criminal court of the Supreme Court.
The reporter saw that the core content of this 10,000-word Opinion on Asking the Supreme Court not to approve the revocation of Lin Senhao's death penalty (I) is that the court should not only rely on Lin Senhao's confession, but also have scientific evidence to judge Huang Yang's death. This submission shows that there are many doubts about the evidence in this case. First, there are two forensic reports in this case. Among them, the Institute of Science and Technology of the Ministry of Justice did not detect dimethylnitrosamine in the urine of the victim, while the test results of the Shanghai Public Security Bureau Identification Center detected dimethylnitrosamine. Two national appraisal institutions have completely different test results for the same sample, but the court found that there were toxic substances. Second, the existing scientific research reports prove that N- dimethylnitrosamine exists widely in the environment. Because the mass spectrum chart at the time of detection is not provided, the existing evidence can not determine whether the detected poison comes from the environment or the human body's own synthesis, nor can it rule out the man-made pollution during sampling and inspection.
At the same time, in the opinion, Fu Lin put forward the application of 1 1 to re-identify the cause of Huang Yang's death. According to this opinion, "there are four test results that can prove that Huang Yang's death is not poisoning". In addition, the application of 1 1 also includes the application for identification of drinking fountains and the water in them, the application for fingerprint identification of the so-called "Lin Senhao poisoned drinking fountains and drinking buckets", the retrieval of surveillance videos of 204 laboratories, the identification of surveillance videos of yellow plastic bags filled with poison, etc., because there is no such identification in the archives. In addition, there are cause of death identification, mass spectrometry expert cross-examination, medical accident identification and so on.
It is reported that Xie Tongxiang also went to the Supreme People's Procuratorate with Lin's father. After meeting with the relevant person in charge, he submitted 15 related materials such as Opinions on Requesting the Supreme Court not to approve the revocation of Lin Senhao's death penalty (I) and an application to meet his son Lin Senhao.