The content of this article comes from the Internet, if it is inconsistent with the actual situation or there is infringement, please contact to delete. This article is only published in today's headlines, and it must be investigated!
Lead
The story takes place in March 2022, an ordinary day, but it turned into a family nightmare. Li and her son, who were originally just going to buy some food at a nearby vegetable market, inadvertently fell victim to a terrible incident. In this case, Yao's crazy actions completely turned the family's life upside down. This article will rearrange the narrative of the case, revealing the details of the case, and the final court judgment to show that justice has been done.
It was an ordinary spring day, and Li took her two-year-old son to a nearby vegetable market, and unprepared, a terrorist attack began. Li was attacked by a man named Yao, who first sprayed chili water at Li and then slashed Li's head with a sapper shovel, while Li's son, lying innocently in a cart, was also attacked.
Yao did not stop there, he walked towards the gate of the community, injuring a six-year-old boy in the community on the way. Finally arriving at a fish shop at the gate of the community, Yao tried to attack the boss again with a sapper shovel, however, this time he was successfully repelled by the boss.
Yao returned home and thought about suicide in despair, but in the end he failed to do so. He suddenly changed his mind, took the initiative to call the 110 police number, and was arrested by the police at his home.
Li's two-year-old son was rushed to the hospital for rescue, but unfortunately, the rescue was ineffective, and the child died tragically. The hospital's identification showed that the cause of the child's death was a severe head injury.
Li was grief-stricken at the death of a child who was born after many IVF attempts, and despite the difficulties at home, they still wanted to be able to raise the child well. However, fate was cruel to them, and Li said bitterly that the child was too young to leave even a trace of ashes.
Yao was taken back to the police station for investigation and interrogation, and his background showed that he only graduated from junior high school and worked as a game anchor at home for a long time, but due to poor income, his cleanliness and obsessive-compulsive disorder gradually worsened, which eventually led to his suicidal thoughts.
Yao thought, since he has reached the edge of life, why not take some people to hell before committing suicide? He believes that Li's children affect his rest, and the fish shop owner is disrespectful to his relatives and friends, so he chooses several targets.
However, Yao's parents claimed that there was no conflict with Li's family. Li also insisted that communication between the two families was extremely limited, with the only two encounters being when Yao came to complain that the mop had soiled his clothes, but left after seeing that the mop was not drying on her balcony. Another time was Yao's father who helped install water and electricity, but this was also handed over by Li's husband, and Li could not understand why Yao would attack him and his children.
After judicial evaluation, it was found that Yao suffered from mental illness with gaming disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder, however, at the critical moment, Yao still had full capacity for civil conduct.
In the people's court trial, Yao was found guilty of intentional homicide, and although he turned himself in, it was not enough to reduce his punishment. In the end, Yao was sentenced to death and was required to compensate Li and his wife for funeral expenses and other 50,000 yuan.
Interpret the law by case
The key issue in this case is that Yao's crime was intentional homicide, which is beyond doubt. The fact of intentional homicide is undeniable, regardless of mental illness or external factors. Yao's aggressive behavior exposed his madness and danger.
During police questioning, Yao claimed that his attack was because the owner of the fish shop had a conflict with him and his relatives, and Li had affected his rest after giving birth, so he chose to attack them. However, this is not the case, and Yao's parents confirmed that Li's family did not have much with them
Intersection. As for the owner of the fish shop, Yao claimed that he had acted disrespectfully to his relatives and friends, so he regarded him as a reasonable target. However, Yao's actions showed obvious intentional intent to harm others.
Yao's evil deeds led to the tragic death of Li's two-year-old son, and Li himself, as well as the owner of the fish shop and the six-year-old boy, were also injured. Yao's behavior was extremely despicable, he illegally took innocent lives, and his crime was too serious to ignore. His subjective intentions are clearly discernible and prove his guilt.
Although the judicial evaluation determined that Yao suffered from gaming disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder, he still had full civil capacity at the time of the crime. This means that Yao's criminal act was completed in a sober state, and he cannot use mental illness to escape criminal responsibility. While mental illness may be the cause of some criminal acts, not all people with mental illness are immune from prosecution.
Looking back at the entire case, the victims were innocent. Yao's subjective malice is obvious, and his behavior cannot be tolerated. Therefore, the decision of the court of first instance to sentence Yao to death was reasonable. Neither mental illness nor hardship can justify depriving others of their lives. Yao claimed to want to commit suicide, but before committing suicide, he hurt others first, which shows that his behavior is unusually twisted, and he is a criminal who seeks his own twisted satisfaction.
In the end, justice was served, and the outcome of the case reflected the firmness of the law towards the criminals, especially for such serious and egregious crimes. Hopefully, this case serves as a warning to other potential criminals, and also remembers the innocent two-year-old who became the victim of this tragedy
The above content and materials are derived from the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or allude to any real country, political system, organization, race, individual. The above does not mean that the author of this article endorses the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any issues arising above or related to any of the above, nor does it assume any direct or indirect legal liability.