It is not easy to be original, and the whole network has been turned on to automatically protect rights, please do not plagiarize and carry it!
More than a year has passed since the second-instance verdict in the Lao Rongzhi case was announced, and the review of the death penalty in the case has not progressed for a long time, making Lao Rongzhi's "whether he will die or not" a suspense.
Should Lo Rongzhi be executed immediately?
Regarding the issue of Lao Rongzhi's "whether he will die or not", those who pay attention to this case are divided into two factions:
After all, judging from all the public information so far, Lao Rongzhi is undoubtedly full of evil and ruthless, and her hands have been stained with several innocent lives, and she has been at large for 20 years after the incident, and now she is also a consolation to the victim's soul in heaven.
However, some people believe that there is not enough evidence in the case of Lao Rongzhi to directly show that she is the main culprit in the case, or directly participated in key crimes, and the fairness and rigor of the law is more important than whether Lao Rongzhi should be sentenced to death!
Is Lo Rongzhi demonized?
First of all, we should recognize a concept: before the court decides, all criminals are suspects.
After Lao Rongzhi was brought to justice in 2019, the first trial was conducted in 2021 and the verdict was publicly announced. However, during this period, the prosecution repeatedly said in interviews that Lao Rongzhi was a "stupid white sweet" and a "demon", and this preconceived approach did not conform to the core intent of the Criminal Procedure Law.
At the same time, Law's defense has been subjected to varying degrees of public violence and verbal attacks, many of which are based on ordinary personal feelings, which led to the above incidents, but we should understand that the world is never black and white.
The significance of the lawyer's defense of the "bad guys" is to let the innocent get innocent and let the guilty die clearly.
As Mr. Luo Xiang said:
The law is the legal principle of crime, and the law is never an idea, not an opinion, let alone a mental law.
This passage made me see the possibility that Lao Rongzhi would not be executed immediately.
Judging from all the public information, there are two key pieces of evidence in the Lao case:
The first is the testimony of the sole survivor, Liu, according to his description: After he was kidnapped by Fa Ziying, during his detention, he heard Lao Rongzhi say to Fa Ziying, "If I don't come back, I'll kill him." ”
However, the case did not result in a murder, and Liu also refused to testify in court, which is a bit unreasonable to use this as one of the bases for the death penalty.
The second is handwriting identification, when the prosecution combed the historical evidence of the case for the second time, it was found that it was suspected that the handwriting of the second person was written, so through the appraisal, it was determined that it was written by Lao Rongzhi, because "the mentality at the time of writing, so there is a certain difference in handwriting", and whether this kind of imrigorous conclusion can become legal evidence is also debatable.
From the perspective of personal emotions and the victim's point of view, we all very much want to see Lo Rongzhi surrendered, but it should be based on one premise: the evidence is sufficient and conclusive. Rather than inferences, assumptions, or even artificial guidance through preconceived ideas.
Relatively speaking, the fairness and rigor of the law have more priority and necessity.
The Huge case has been a wake-up call for us, and we must take warning!