On January 31, 2024, Shangluo, Shaanxi, the wind was cold.
"I'm going to tell my father the results quickly. After getting the verdict, the stone that pressed on Wang Lei's (pseudonym) heart finally landed. When my father died, I was most worried about the case of my sister Wang Shan (pseudonym).
From the case in January 2014 to the final verdict in January 2024, it has been ten years. What twists and turns did this retrial verdict, which carries the demands of Wang Lei's family for fairness and justice, go through? Can it be determined that the defendant committed the crime with only the defendant's confession and circumstantial evidence? How can a complete evidence system be constructed in an intentional homicide case that occurred between specific persons in a specific place and between a specific relationship?
While Wang Lei's family is anxiously waiting, how to accurately determine the facts of the case and ensure that the prosecution can be concluded and resisted accurately is also the direction that the prosecutor handling the case has been working towards.
Murder was caused during the fight
"My daughter was killed in a rented house!" On January 5, 2014, near noon, the Shangzhou Branch of the Shangluo City Public Security Bureau received a call to report the case. After the police were dispatched, the investigators preliminarily judged that it was a homicide case.
Wang Shan's former live-in boyfriend Chen Mouhong's whereabouts are unknown after the case, and he is suspected of committing a major crime. Chen Mouhong and Wang Shan met in 2009, and then developed into boyfriend and girlfriend and began to live together. At first, the two got along well, but later they often quarreled over trivial matters in life. After Chen Mouhong was released from prison for theft, Wang Shan borrowed 10,000 yuan from her cousin to learn excavator driving skills, but she squandered it, and the conflict between the two became deeper and deeper. Wang Shan once proposed to break up, but Chen Mouhong disagreed, and went to Wang Shan's workplace many times to make trouble, causing Wang Shan to resign.
On February 25, 2014, Chen Mouhong was arrested. After arriving at the case, Chen Mouhong confessed to the crime of killing Wang Shan by mistake, and voluntarily confessed the crime of stealing a motorcycle with others on February 22 of the same year.
According to Chen Mouhong's confession, on the evening of December 30, 2013, he went to the mahjong parlor to send money to Wang Shan, during which the two had a quarrel. On the way home, when Chen Mouhong got out of the car to buy cigarettes, Wang Shan left alone in the car and did not go home. After Chen Mouhong returned home, he cut many of Wang Shan's clothes with knives to vent his anger.
Late at night on December 31, 2013, Wang Shan returned to the rental house to rest. When he got up at noon on the second day to change clothes, he found that his clothes were torn, and then had a fierce quarrel with Chen Mouhong. Chen Mouhong grabbed Wang Shan's neck with her hand and pressed her down on the bed until Wang Shan stopped resisting. When Chen Mouhong was resting in the living room, Wang Shan ran out of the bedroom, the two scuffled together, Chen Mouhong picked up the pillow on the sofa in the living room and covered Wang Shan's face, found that Wang Shan did not move, and carried him to the bedroom bed and covered it with a quilt, and hurriedly took Wang Shan's mobile phone and went out. The next day, Chen Mouhong returned to his residence to find that Wang Shan had died, and fled to Xi'an after cleaning up the rental house. According to the forensic examination, the victim died of mechanical asphyxiation.
After the investigation by the public security organs was concluded, Chen Mouhong was transferred to the Shangzhou District Procuratorate for review and prosecution on suspicion of intentional homicide and theft. On June 18, 2014, the Shangzhou District Procuratorate submitted the case to the Shangluo City Procuratorate for review and prosecution.
"Because the murder occurred in a specific space, and there was no clear physical evidence, we conducted a first-hand review of the evidence in the case before the prosecution. Mu Lan, who has now been selected to serve as a prosecutor in the Shaanxi Provincial Procuratorate, took on the case when he was at the Shangluo City Procuratorate. She told reporters that the procuratorial organs have examined the authenticity of the evidence that the public security organs have obtained, such as the confessions of the criminal suspects and the on-site inquest, and have also verified the evidence that the public security organs have put forward that there is no way to obtain, such as Chen Mouhong's mobile phone that was discarded into the river after being smashed.
Mu Lan told reporters that Chen Mouhong confessed that on the afternoon after the crime, he used Wang Shan's mobile phone to call his sister, brother-in-law and friends. This plot is consistent with the list of Wang Shan's telephone calls and witness testimony obtained. Wang Shan's cousin and best friend said that after Wang Shan's parents couldn't contact their daughter, they called them to help get in touch. They hung up calls to Wang Shan's mobile phone, and then received a reply text message, saying that it was inconvenient to answer. This is consistent with Chen Mouhong's confession that he did not dare to answer the phone and replied to false text messages in the name of Wang Shan.
On September 18, 2014, the Shangluo City Procuratorate filed a public prosecution with the Shangluo City Intermediate Court on suspicion of intentional homicide and theft, and Wang Shan's relatives filed an attached civil lawsuit against Chen Mouhong for compensation. On December 25 of the same year, the Shangluo City Intermediate People's Court made a first-instance judgment, finding that Chen Mouhong had committed the crime of theft, sentenced him to two years in prison and a fine of 5,000 yuan, and rejected the plaintiff's claim in the attached civil lawsuit on the grounds of insufficient evidence. Wang Shan's relatives appealed against this result. The Shangluo City Procuratorate raised a protest in accordance with the law, and the Shaanxi Provincial Procuratorate supported the protest.
The trial court held that:
It is not excluded that someone else may commit the crime
What everyone didn't expect was that this murder case, in which the defendant always pleaded guilty, would go through multiple judicial procedures and go all the way to the highest judicial organ.
On January 26, 2016, the Shaanxi Provincial High Court made a second-instance ruling, revoking the original judgment and remanding for a new trial on the grounds that the facts ascertained in the original judgment were unclear. On March 20, 2017, the Shangluo Intermediate People's Court rendered the same judgment as the original first instance. The plaintiff in the attached civil lawsuit appealed again, the Shangluo City Procuratorate again raised a protest, and the Shaanxi Provincial Procuratorate again supported the protest. On November 11, 2019, the Shaanxi Provincial High Court made a second-instance ruling, rejecting the appeal and counter-appeal and upholding the original judgment.
After receiving the second-instance ruling, Li Jiali, the prosecutor handling the case of the Shaanxi Provincial Procuratorate, through repeated research on the facts of the case and careful study and judgment of the evidence in the whole case, was convinced that the evidence in the whole case corroborated each other, forming a complete chain of evidence, which could eliminate reasonable doubt and determine that Chen Mouhong had committed the crime of intentional homicide. After deliberation by the Inspection Committee of the Shaanxi Provincial Procuratorate, on March 25, 2020, the Shaanxi Provincial Procuratorate submitted a protest to the Supreme People's Procuratorate.
In the face of the differences between the two courts, after accepting the case, the prosecutor handling the case from the Second Procuratorate of the Supreme People's Procuratorate, which was in charge of the case, rushed to Shangluo and Xi'an to have a discussion with the judges of the courts of first and second instance.
"The court held that the evidence that the procuratorate accused Chen Mouhong of committing intentional homicide was mainly his confession, and there was no physical evidence with clear direction. According to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law, where only the defendant confesses and there is no other evidence, the defendant cannot be found guilty and punished. The prosecutor handling the case of the Second Procuratorate told reporters that in the eyes of the judges, there are still some doubts in the case, and the existing evidence cannot draw a unique conclusion, and the possibility that someone else committed the crime or Chen Mouhong took the blame for others cannot be ruled out.
The reporter noted that in the court's view, the doubts that cannot be concluded exclusively mainly include four aspects: First, the time of the victim's death is doubtful. The forensic doctor deduced that the time of Wang Shan's death was about 3 days before the autopsy, and the autopsy was on January 5, which is inconsistent with Chen Mouhong's confession that the time of the crime was noon on January 1. In addition, when Wang Shan's parents reported the case on January 5, they said that their daughter called home on the evening of January 1 or 2 (I can't remember the exact day) and asked if the key to the rental house was at home. The second is Chen Mouhong's confession that he stayed in a hotel on the night of the crime, and the next day he went back to the rental house to put all the torn clothes into the cabinet, and took away the garbage after cleaning the rental house. However, evidence such as accommodation registration records and garbage could not be retrieved from the case, and the scene investigation recorded that there were many pieces of Wang Shan's clothes that had been cut on the bed in the bedroom at the scene of the crime. The third is that Chen Mouhong has a mobile phone, but it is unreasonable to use Wang Shan's mobile phone to call others after committing the crime. The whereabouts of the keys to the rental house held by Wang Shan and Chen Mouhong are unknown, and the possibility of others entering the scene with the keys to commit the crime cannot be ruled out. Fourth, after the court ruled that the crime of intentional homicide could not be established, Chen Mouhong still steadily confessed that he caused Wang Shan to die, which does not conform to the common sense of ordinary people who fear crime and avoid crime.
Details of the defendant's confession
"You can't know until you know it"
In a village in Shangluo City, the prosecutor handling the case of the Second Procuratorate met Chen Mouhong. Although many years have passed since the incident, Chen Mouhong still admits the facts of his crime of accidentally killing Wang Shan, and the basic content of his confession is consistent with his previous confessions, and gives a reasonable explanation for the doubts in some cases.
For example, the question of where the keys to the rental house go. The landlord of the rental house, Wang Shan's parents, and Chen Mouhong confirmed that they gave the tenant a total of three keys when renting the house, which were placed at Wang Shan's parents, Wang Shan's cousin, and Chen Mouhong. Chen Mouhong said that after returning home for the last time, he left the key at home and did not take it away. The landlord confirmed that after the incident, all the keys to the house had been returned. The on-site inspection records and photos all show that the door lock is intact and there is no abnormality. Therefore, there is no possibility that a third person can pick up the key and enter the house to kill Wang Shan.
"After the incident, I was nervous, and I entered the phone number to make the outgoing call, but I didn't notice that it was Wang Shan's mobile phone. I fled to Xi'an, but I didn't feel familiar with my life, so I simply returned to my hometown and went with the flow. Regarding the suspicion that "it is unreasonable to use Wang Shan's mobile phone to call others when he has a mobile phone", the prosecutor handling the case of the Second Procuratorate also verified.
The prosecutor handling the case of the Second Procuratorate verified the testimony of Wang Shan's parents on the day of the report. Wang Shan's father said that he was very confused on the day of the report, and he could not tell the time of his daughter's last call, and at that time he also reported to the police who handled the case that he could not remember the specific day, and after calming down, he determined that the time of his daughter's last call and the last time he went home for dinner was the same day, that is, December 31, 2013.
During the examination of the case, the Second Procuratorate Office commissioned the Technical Information Research Center of the Supreme People's Procuratorate to conduct a technical evidence review, and the forensic medical examiner's opinion held that external environmental factors, especially temperature, humidity, and air circulation, have a great impact on the changes in a person's posthumous life, and that temperature is the most important external influencing factor, and that low temperature can delay the occurrence and development of corpse decomposition. When the prosecutor handling the case of the Second Public Prosecutor's Office questioned the two forensic examiners who performed the autopsy in the case, they also expressed the same opinion.
It is reported that at the scene of the crime that year, the indoor heating equipment only had one electric heater and was turned off. January 1, 2014 is the first day of the lunar month, the weather is cold, January 5 on-site investigation of the temperature is 10 degrees, relative humidity 20%. The prosecutor handling the case of the Second Procuratorate believes that in this environment, Chen Mouhong's confession that Wang Shan's time of death was noon on January 1 does not contradict the forensic doctor's inference that the death was about 3 days before the autopsy based on the analysis of the degree of decay of the corpse.
"The focus of the dispute in this case is whether the available evidence can determine that Chen Mouhong caused Wang Shan. The prosecutor handling the case of the Second Procuratorate told reporters that although the direct evidence to prove Chen Mouhong's crime was only Chen Mouhong's guilty confession, his confession contained a large number of hidden details, which were "imperceptible unless he personally committed the crime" and "unknowable unless he committed the crime himself", and the content of the confession and other evidence such as on-site investigation, autopsy report, and witness testimony can corroborate each other, so it can be determined that Chen Mouhong committed the crime.
For example, Chen Mouhong confessed that he choked the victim's neck and the two fell down while fighting in the living room, which are all hidden circumstances that investigators did not know before. There were no injuries on the outside of the victim's neck, but it was only through a later autopsy that injuries were discovered, as well as abrasions from falls. Chen Mouhong's confession of carrying the victim to the bed, covering her with a quilt, and putting the victim's slippers on the shoe rack at the door, is consistent with the situation recorded in the on-site investigation. Chen Mouhong said that when she left the scene for the last time, she closed the door and did not lock it, which was consistent with the description of Wang Shan's mother who was the first to enter the scene. The prosecutor handling the case of the Second Procuratorate said that there were a large number of torn clothes in the cabinet at the scene of the crime, and there were knives in the room, although there were still cut clothes on the bed in the bedroom, but these clothes were pressed under the quilt and could not be seen on the surface, which was consistent with Chen Mouhong's confession.
In addition, no traces of a third person were detected at the scene of the crime, the gold necklace around the victim's neck and the property in the house were all there, the victim was not sexually assaulted, and there was no reasonable suspicion that someone else had committed the crime.
Regarding whether Chen Mouhong was tortured to extract a confession or induce a confession, the prosecutor handling the case of the Second Procuratorate also verified with the two investigators who interrogated Chen Mouhong for the first time during the investigation. In the course of the first and second instance trials, Chen Mouhong made it clear that the investigators did not extort confessions by torture, induce confessions and other illegal acts.
In view of the above-mentioned suspicions, the prosecutor handling the case of the Second Procuratorate Office carried out investigation and verification work.
After the Supreme People's Procuratorate appealed
The retrial court commuted the sentence to an indefinite term
In order to ensure a precise prosecutorial appeal, on January 28, 2021, the Second Procuratorate Office convened a joint meeting of prosecutors on the case, and after discussion, it was determined that a prosecutorial counter-appeal should be made. On February 7 of the same year, the Second Procuratorate organized an expert argument, and a total of six criminal law experts, scholars, and forensic doctors participated in the argument, unanimously holding that a protest should be filed with the Supreme People's Court.
After deliberation by the Supreme People's Procuratorate, on November 5, 2021, the Supreme People's Procuratorate lodged a protest with the Supreme People's Court. On August 24, 2022, the SPC ordered the Henan Provincial High Court to retry the case.
On August 31, 2023, the Henan Provincial High Court held a trial of the case, and the Henan Provincial Procuratorate sent prosecutors Wang Yanwu and Wu Jiong and assistant prosecutor Duan Huijuan to appear in court to perform their duties, and the prosecutor handling the case from the Second Procuratorate Office provided on-site guidance throughout the process. During the trial, the prosecutor displayed evidence in an orderly manner, analyzed and demonstrated the facts of the case in detail, and constructed a complete evidence system, especially for the authenticity of Chen Mouhong's guilty confession, and interrogated Chen Mouhong in court. After the trial, the chief procurator of the Henan Provincial Procuratorate attended the trial committee of the Provincial High Court as an observer in accordance with the law, and comprehensively expounded the reasons for the protest. On January 31 this year, the Henan Provincial High Court announced the retrial verdict, adopting all the procuratorial counter-appeal opinions, finding that Chen Mouhong constituted intentional homicide, and commuting his sentence to life imprisonment and deprivation of political rights for life.
Cases of intentional homicide that occur in specific places and between specific related persons often lack clearly directed surveillance video, physical evidence, and verbal evidence. Therefore, the successful protest of this case is also of great practical significance. The Second Public Prosecutor's Office pointed out that—
In terms of the use of the rules of evidence, in the review and judgment of evidence in such cases, it is necessary to use the characteristics of "cannot be perceived unless you have personally experienced the crime" and "you cannot know about the crime unless you have committed the crime", fully excavate the concealed and specific details in the confession, and when the defendant's confession and other evidence in the case can be corroborated one by one, and the possibility of illegal evidence collection can be ruled out, the defendant can be locked as the perpetrator on this basis.
In terms of grasping the standard of proof, proof of criminal procedure is a retrospective judicial proof activity, and it is impossible to completely restore all the details of criminal activities, and when the proof of the facts constituting the elements has reached the level of inner conviction, and the defendant cannot give a reasonable explanation for committing the crime, it can be found that the defendant's crime has been beyond reasonable doubt.
Source: China Popular Law