Daqing Intermediate People's Court was appointed to have jurisdiction over the case of intentional homicide and false accusation against children. The pictures in this article are all from the paper reporter Xie Yinzong.
At the same time that Tong was investigated for criminal responsibility for false accusation and frame-up in Hainan, the Higher People's Court of Heilongjiang Province made a retrial decision of 202 1, instructing Daqing Intermediate People's Court to retry Tong's old case. At the same time, on May 26th, 20021year, the Supreme People's Court made a written decision to designate jurisdiction, and transferred the case of child false accusation and frame-up to Daqing Intermediate People's Court for trial.
Paper165438+1The judgment obtained from relevant channels on October 25th showed that Daqing Intermediate People's Court held that the child took violent measures and deliberately deprived others of his life with a sharp knife, resulting in one death, and his behavior constituted the crime of intentional homicide. The expression of "homicide" in the original trial was improper and should be corrected. At the same time, Tong fabricated facts and falsely accused and framed others, resulting in the serious consequences of four security guards being wrongly detained, and his behavior has constituted the crime of falsely accusing and framing.
Daqing Intermediate People's Court subsequently decided to revoke the original judgment of the Intermediate People's Court of Suihua District, Heilongjiang Province, and the child was sentenced to life imprisonment and deprived of political rights for life for intentional homicide; He was sentenced to three years in prison for false accusation and frame-up. Decided to execute life imprisonment and deprive political rights for life.
Informed sources told the newspaper that Tong refused to accept the retrial judgment and appealed.
The false accusation against four security guards led to an old murder case in Northeast China.
Tong could never have imagined that he would be sentenced to life imprisonment for an old case because of a conflict in Tianmao Company, Sanya City, Hainan Province on 20/8.
On September 27th, 20 18, Tong, who worked under Zhang Xuecheng, the former shareholder of Tianmao Company, and Zhang Xuecheng went to Tianmao Company, Jiefang Road, Tianya District, Sanya City to audit the accounts.
At the same time, Zhang Xuecheng was taken to the police station by the police to understand the situation, and the children who stayed in the company were asked to leave by the security guards Liu Lizhong and Yue of Tianmao Company. Subsequently, the two sides had a squabble and caused a fight.
On September 27th, 20 18, a child was injured in a fight and falsely accused and framed four security guards of Tianmao Company. Source map
Judicial materials show that during the fighting between the two sides, Liu Lizhong picked up a tile from the fire escape and hit the child on the head, causing the tile to break. Tong also beat Liu Lizhong, Yue and others with black iron sheets. Liu Lizhong and Yue hit the child's head with broken tiles again, and the child's head bled on the spot. After the two sides stopped, the police of Xinfeng Police Station of Tianya Branch of Sanya Public Security Bureau brought the two sides back.
Later, the police identified Yan's injury. According to the appraisal materials obtained in this paper, the child was slightly injured in the 201810/the first notice of living forensic identification issued by the Judicial Appraisal Center of Sanya Public Security Bureau.
Before the injury appraisal report was made, four people, including Liu Lizhong, were criminally detained on June 2, 20 18 10 on suspicion of stirring up trouble.
Qi Guiling, the legal representative of Tianmao Company, told the newspaper that because four security guards were imprisoned, her husband Cao Bo, who was the legal representative of Tianmao Company at that time, found Tong's brother through connections, hoping to compensate and solve the matter, but Tong refused.
On 20 18 1 1.4, the Judicial Appraisal Center of Sanya Public Security Bureau issued the "Appraisal of the Degree of Human Injury in Forensic Medicine", saying that the child's injury was rated as serious injury II due to skull depression or comminuted fracture.
The day after the injury report was made, four security guards, Liu Lizhong, were arrested on suspicion of intentional injury. 20 19 18, the investigation of Tianya branch of Sanya Public Security Bureau ended, and Liu Lizhong was transferred to the suburban procuratorate for intentional injury.
The surveillance video of Tianmao Company showed that before the fight between the two sides, the child's forehead was sunken, which was not caused by the security guard's beating. Tianmao Company and its original legal representative, while reporting the situation to the relevant departments, also applied for re-appraisal of the child's injury.
After appraisal, the Physical Evidence Appraisal Center of Hainan Provincial Public Security Department issued an appraisal conclusion on May 24, 20 19, saying that the depression of Tong's left frontal bone existed before the injury on September 27, and no pathological changes of the traumatic fracture were detected. According to other examinations, it is determined that the forehead contusion caused by trauma in children is a minor injury.
2065438+On June 7, 2009, Liu Lizhong, who was wrongly detained for 239 days, was released on bail pending trial. After the prosecution decided not to prosecute, he received state compensation. 201910/0/2 1, Tong was criminally detained by Tianya Branch of Sanya Public Security Bureau on suspicion of false accusation and frame-up, and was arrested in June of the same year.
Tianmao Company, while investigating the false accusation and framed case of Tong, also found through investigation that Tong 1992 killed someone in Northeast China, and his parole was illegal.
The verdict of Suihua District Intermediate People's Court recorded the murder of Tong. The case happened at1992 February 4 13, in Baihua Garden Ballroom, Anda City, Suihua. On that day, there was a dispute with Cai, and there were many contradictions. Zhu Shoubin, who went to the ballroom with Cai, insulted Tong and punched him.
During the fight, the child stabbed Zhu Shoubin in the chest and abdomen with a sharp knife and fled the scene. Zhu Shoubin died on the way to the hospital. After forensic identification, Zhu Shoubin was stabbed in the heart and liver by a sharp instrument, causing massive blood loss and death.
Suspected of violating post-parole identity bleaching
According to the original judgment, Tong surrendered himself to the public security organ on March 20, 1992.
The Intermediate People's Court of Suihua District held that children ignored the national laws, quarreled in public places because of trivial matters, and even killed people with knives, which constituted the crime of intentional homicide. In view of the fact that the child surrendered himself, the victim Zhu Shoubin was at fault, and considering the circumstances that the child's family actively compensated for economic losses, he could be given a lighter punishment.
The Intermediate People's Court of Suihua District sentenced the child to fixed-term imprisonment of 15 years and deprived of political rights for 5 years. The term of imprisonment ranged from March 20th, 2007 1992 to March 9th 19.
Tong was sentenced to 15, and actually served less than four and a half years in prison.
The release certificate obtained by the newspaper shows that the release time of the child is1August 26, 1996, and the reason for the release is parole. The release certificate also stated that Tong Sheng Jun was sentenced to four years' imprisonment.
The verdict of the child framed case made by the Sanya Suburb Court stated that the case-handling unit obtained the child's verdict, release certificate and other case files in Mudanjiang Prison. This is to certify that Tong was convicted of intentional homicide on July 3, 1992 by Suihua Intermediate People's Court with 15. Four years after the execution of the penalty, Wang Moxiang, his wife, was released on parole on August 26th, 1996 because she was suffering from epilepsy and could not take care of herself.
To the surprise of Liu Lizhong, Qi Guiling and others, Tong's criminal record of intentional homicide "disappeared" after he moved into the household registration, and now there is no such criminal record in his identity information.
Liu Lizhong and others intentionally injured the case file to confirm their statement, which stated: 2065438+September 27, 2008, when two policemen from Xinfeng Police Station of Tianya Branch of Sanya Public Security Bureau inquired about the child online, no criminal record was found.
Regarding the parole of children and the fact that there is no criminal record in their existing identity information, the director of Jingmen Law Firm and a well-known criminal defense lawyer said in an interview with this newspaper that according to the law at that time, the necessary condition for a prisoner to be released on parole is that he can only be released on parole after serving half of his sentence. If he can't meet this condition, he can't be released on parole.
Lawyers of Beijing Law Firm believe that children's wives can't take care of themselves because of epilepsy, which does not belong to the "special circumstances" of the Supreme People's Court's June 19 10 Provisions on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Laws in Handling Cases of Commutation and Parole.
And said that the criminal law 1979 is applicable to the crime and parole of children. Article 73 of the Law stipulates that a criminal sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment shall be released on parole if he has executed more than half of the original sentence and has truly repented and no longer endangers society. Under special circumstances, it may not be subject to the above-mentioned restrictions on the execution of the sentence.
Wang Shaoguang said that the "special circumstances" in Article 73 of1991kloc-0/Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Laws in Handling Cases of Commutation and Parole have different interpretations. "Special circumstances" generally refers to the original work unit's request for bail pending trial due to special needs such as important production and major scientific research; Or there are other special circumstances. Obviously, it is not a statutory parole condition for a child's wife to be unable to take care of herself because of epilepsy. Even if she meets the condition of "true repentance and no harm to society", she will have to serve more than half of her sentence, that is, she must be more than seven years and six months.
Yue and Liu Lizhong, security guards of Tianmao Company who were framed by children and wrongly detained for 239 days, are outside the detention center. Source map
Old murders and false accusations are being retried.
A person close to Tong told the newspaper that after the murder case of Tong was exposed by the media, it attracted the attention of the Supreme People's Court, and an investigation team was set up in Heilongjiang Province to investigate the case.
The judgment of Daqing Intermediate People's Court also confirmed the above statement. On February 23, 2020, the child accused of false accusation was sentenced to three years' imprisonment by the suburban court of Sanya City, and the child refused to accept the appeal. On the same day that Sanya Intermediate People's Court sent the case back for retrial on May/July, 2002 12002, Heilongjiang Higher People's Court made a retrial decisionNo.12, instructing Daqing Intermediate People's Court to retry the case of intentional homicide of children.
At the same time, on May 2 1, the Supreme People's Court made the decision of the Supreme Law No.326 to designate jurisdiction, and ordered that the case of child false accusation and frame-up be transferred to Daqing Intermediate People's Court for trial.
On 2021September 17, Daqing Intermediate People's Court made a decision to combine the crime of false accusation against children with the crime of intentional homicide.
In the trial of intentional homicide, Daqing Intermediate People's Court found out that at about 13 on February 4, 1992, Tong had an altercation with Cai in the ballroom of Baihua Garden in Anda City, and had a physical conflict with Cai's friend Zhu Shoubin, and then a fight broke out. In the fight, the child stabbed Zhu Shoubin in the chest and abdomen with a sharp knife. After Zhu Shoubin fell to the ground, Tong cut Zhu Shoubin's head with an axe he carried with him and fled the scene.
Tong confessed that the sharp knife that stabbed Zhu Shoubin was carried by Zhu Shoubin himself. His defender also claimed that Zhu Shoubin took a sharp knife to the crime scene and played a leading role, which was at fault for the occurrence of the case.
According to the investigation of Daqing Intermediate People's Court, regarding the fighting process and the source of the sharp knife, several witnesses testified on the day of the incident and the next day that Tong took the lead in cutting Zhu Shoubin with an axe, and Tong held the axe in one hand and the knife in the other. None of the witnesses confirmed that the sharp knife belonged to Zhu Shoubin. After Tong was brought to justice more than a month after the crime, many witnesses overturned the original testimony and renamed Zhu Shoubin's first hand and the sharp knife that committed the crime as Zhu Shoubin's. The above testimony does not conform to the memory law, and there is no reasonable explanation and no other evidence to support it. Therefore, the preliminary testimony made by the above witnesses after the incident should be accepted. The relevant defense opinions put forward by the defender will not be adopted.
Daqing Intermediate People's Court held that the fact that the prosecutor put forward in court that the facts of the original trial were unclear, that the sharp knife used by the child was brought to the scene by Zhu Shoubin, and that Zhu Shoubin beat the child first was not sufficient. Based on this, the opinion that the victim was at fault was established and adopted by our court.
On this basis, Daqing Intermediate People's Court held that the crime of intentional homicide has been constituted by children taking violent measures and deliberately depriving others of their lives with sharp knives, resulting in one death. The original trial found that Zhu Shoubin was at fault in the case of intentional homicide, and the expression of "homicide" in the original trial was improper and should be corrected. At the same time, children in intentional homicide cases have statutory discretionary sentencing circumstances such as surrendering themselves and actively compensating the victims for losses, which can be given a lighter punishment.
Regarding the case of false accusation and frame-up, the court found that according to the child case in 2002, it can be confirmed that the child had an old head fracture before the incident. Combined with the video surveillance of the crime scene, we can clearly see an abnormal dent in the left forehead. He knew that his old head fracture had nothing to do with the injury, but he deliberately concealed the fact of his old head fracture during the investigation and forensic identification by the public security organs, misleading the public security personnel and forensic experts to identify his old head fracture, which was in line with the manifestation of the crime of false accusation and frame-up.
At the same time, a witness confirmed that Zhang Xuecheng once said that Tong deliberately "aggravated" the injury in order to "catch enough", and Tong himself confessed that "he did not agree to mediation because Zhang Xuecheng wanted to force the other party to compromise"
The above evidence can prove that Tong knew that his behavior might lead to the consequences that four security guards were taken criminal compulsory measures or even sentenced to punishment, but he still concealed the injury and misled the appraisal, which eventually led to four security guards being wrongly detained.
Daqing Intermediate People's Court held that the public prosecution agency accused the child of falsely accusing and framing the crime, and the facts were clear and the evidence was sufficient.
Tong's old murder case was retried for falsely accusing and framing four security guards. Daqing Intermediate People's Court revoked the original judgment, and Tong was sentenced to life imprisonment for intentional homicide and false accusation. Source map
To sum up, Daqing Intermediate People's Court decided to revoke the original judgment of 1992 made by Suihua Intermediate People's Court of Heilongjiang Province according to the facts, nature, plot and the degree of harm to society. Children committed intentional homicide, sentenced to life imprisonment and deprived of political rights for life; He was convicted of false accusation and sentenced to three years in prison. Decided to execute life imprisonment and deprive political rights for life.
People close to the children told the newspaper that after the retrial judgment came out, the children detained in Heilongjiang refused to accept the judgment and appealed.