Recently, the well-known host Qian Feng was accused of suspected sexual assault, which caused a lot of concern. The woman in question pointed out on Weibo that Qian Feng had raped him at her residence in 2019, and released a series of specific details as evidence. Soon, Hunan Satellite TV announced that before the conclusion of the investigation came out, the channel suspended all its work, and public opinion also reacted fiercely to the matter.
Image source: Police Weibo
On the evening of August 24, in the face of relevant disputes, the official microblog of the Shanghai Changning Public Security Bureau issued a police information circular saying that the woman concerned had reported the case to the police on February 15, 2019, accusing Qian of rape, and the police immediately set up a special case team to launch a comprehensive investigation, believing that the existing evidence could not prove the existence of rape crimes, and made a decision not to file the case on March 15, 2019. Regarding the latest allegations of the woman concerned, the police said that the other party could apply to the procuratorate for supervision of the case.
After the police issued the relevant notice, public opinion quickly diverged. Among them, some people believe that the "existing evidence" determined by the police in 2019 cannot prove the existence of rape crimes, which is equivalent to proving Qian Feng's "innocence". Therefore, these people quickly pointed the finger at the female party who exposed the matter, suggesting that the other party was "framing" Qian Feng. At the same time, some people believe that the content of the police report can only show that there was not enough physical evidence left at the scene at that time, which was not enough to legally convict Qian Feng, but whether Qian Feng sexually assaulted the woman still needs further investigation and clarification.
In the public's simple cognition, whether the police file a case is the "gold standard" to test whether a person has committed sexual assault. Generally speaking, if someone is coerced by the police for alleged sexual assault, most people tend to think that the incident is basically "real hammer". However, on the other hand, if the police do not file a case and take compulsory measures, does it mean that the person concerned must be "innocent"? The reality may be more complicated than some people think. From the perspective of law enforcement agencies and judicial organs, how to determine evidence, judge the nature of the case, and decide on follow-up measures in cases of sexual assault such as forced indecency and rape is a highly professional issue, and may not be completely consistent with the public's intuitive feelings. In this regard, we also need to form a more comprehensive understanding through legal personnel.
At this moment, Qian Feng's case is still in a state of controversy, and the women involved also said that they will submit new evidence and continue to defend their rights through legal means. In contrast, the "Ali female employee infringement case", which was highly concerned by public opinion some time ago, has already made a stage of case progress, so it is more suitable as a case to explain the relevant concepts. On August 25, the criminal suspect in the case, Zhang Mou, was arrested by the procuratorate on suspicion of forced indecency, while another criminal suspect, Wang Mouwen, was still under investigation. For this situation, some lawyers have made interpretations and analysis in media interviews.
According to lawyer Liu Changsong, the procuratorate approved the arrest of criminal suspect Zhang Mou for the crime of forced indecency, indicating that he must be sentenced to at least a sentence of imprisonment or above. Paragraph 1 of article 237 of the Criminal Law stipulates: "Whoever forcibly molests or insults a woman by violence, coercion or other means shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than 5 years or criminal detention." Whoever gathers a crowd or commits the crime mentioned in the preceding paragraph in public in a public place, or has other heinous circumstances, shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than 5 years."
In contrast, Wang Mouwen is currently under residential surveillance. Both criminal detention and residential surveillance are compulsory measures after a criminal case has been filed, criminal detention is carried out in a detention center, and residential surveillance is carried out at a designated residence. Case-handling organs will select a compulsory measure based on factors such as the suspect's own circumstances, the convenience of obtaining case facts, and the convenience of work. Residential surveillance may also be transferred to criminal detention depending on the actual situation.
The different compulsory measures adopted by the prosecution and the police against Zhang and Wang Mouwen show that the evidence intensity of the criminal acts of the two people is different, and the evidence related to Zhang is enough for the prosecution to make a charge that may be sentenced to imprisonment, while the evidence related to Wang Mouwen still needs further investigation.
So, in rape cases, how is the evidence generally determined? In this regard, Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm wrote in a legal popularization article on its official website: Rape forensics generally first consider obtaining the suspect's bodily fluids, as well as clues such as hair, dander, fiber and other clues left by the suspect on the victim, and when the environment permits, fingerprints, palm prints, footprints and many other clues can also be considered, and video and video can also be used as evidence. However, the same article also mentioned that modern social media is highly developed, there are more films, television, networks, books, etc. about crimes, and many defendants have learned how to deal with physical evidence through these media that tell crimes, such as destroying the crime scene, completely destroying clothes stained with fine spots, etc., which have brought greater difficulties to the public security organs' investigation and collection of evidence in rape cases. At the same time, the victims themselves may have undergone multiple treatments, such as physical cleansing and medical treatment. All these have brought difficulties to the public security organs in handling and fixing the physical evidence of the case.
Based on these facts, the crime of rape is indeed difficult to determine. However, it is not impossible to convict a suspect on the basis of circumstantial evidence alone. In response, the Chinese court network published a rape case tried in Chongqing in 2016. In this case, the police and prosecutors did not find much direct evidence of rape, but convicted him through circumstantial evidence.
The Fourth Intermediate People's Court of Chongqing Municipality pointed out in the case analysis: In criminal trials, in the absence of direct evidence or less direct evidence, indirect evidence may be used to determine the main facts of the case, but strict restrictions are followed: indirect evidence is verified to be true, the evidence can be corroborated with each other, there are no contradictions that cannot be excluded and unexplained doubts can be formed, and a complete proof system can be formed; the facts of the case determined on the basis of indirect evidence should be unique, sufficient to exclude all reasonable doubts Reasoning using circumstantial evidence is logical and empirical.
Source: Beijing News, People's Court Network, Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm, etc
Column Editor-in-Chief: Zhang Wu Text Editor: Li Linwei Caption Source: Shangguan Tu Editor Photo Editor: Zi Xi
Source: Author: Yang Xinyu, the shipping warehouse