The Jiangxi Higher People's Court's Second Retrial of Nie Xiaohong's Case Once revealed the "Master Wang Lin" trick scam

Reporting by Hao Cheng, a reporter of this newspaper, Nanchang

The case of Nie Xiaohong, former deputy secretary general of the Yichun Municipal CPC Committee of Jiangxi Province and director of the Reception Department of the Municipal PARTY Committee and Municipal Government, which had attracted much attention from all parties because of his connection with "Master Wang Lin", was recently retried at the Jiangxi Provincial High People's Court (hereinafter referred to as the "Jiangxi Higher People's Court"). As of the release of the reporter of China Business Daily, the case has not yet been pronounced, which is also the second time that the case has been retried by the Jiangxi Higher People's Court.

Nie Xiaohong was once retaliated by Wang Lin and Song Chenguang, then secretary of the Yichun Municipal Party Committee, for exposing Wang Lin's tricks of changing snakes and wine. At present, Wang Lin has died, and Song Chenguang has been dismissed and sentenced to a suspended death. Nie Xiaohong's case ushered in several sentence revisions and retrials, with a sentence of 14 years in the first instance, 12 years in the second instance, and a sentence of 7 years in prison in the first retrial.

The reporter of China Business Daily learned that in this trial, two suspected bribes totaling 8,000 yuan became an important focus of the trial. During the trial, 11 witnesses appeared. Five NPC deputies and provincial people's congress deputies observed the trial.

In fact, it has been 15 years since the incident. Nie Xiaohong had always insisted that he was innocent and had been framed by Wang Lin and others. At the behest of the Supreme People's Procuratorate, in 2018, the Jiangxi Provincial Procuratorate launched a review procedure, and after two years of review and evidence collection, issued a "Procuratorial Recommendation for Retrial" to the Jiangxi Higher People's Court in 2020. The Jiangxi Higher People's Court reopened the case on June 8, 2020, and held a public hearing on January 15, 2021.

"This (retrial) session lasted a whole day, fully protecting the litigation rights of all parties, and many issues were thoroughly tried." A npc deputy who observed the case told reporters that in her opinion, although the case has not been pronounced, the answer is already very clear. Previously, the Jiangxi Higher People's Court had acquitted Zhang Yuhuan on the grounds that there was no principle of doubt, which was praised by all sectors of society.

Focus on 8,000 yuan suspense

According to the earlier judgment, Nie Xiaohong was personally accused of having 7 economic problems totaling more than 70,000 yuan, but after the procuratorial organs reviewed them, it has been determined in the retrial procuratorial suggestions that 5 of them totaling more than 62,000 yuan are not established. At the time of this trial, the public prosecutor and the defender agreed on the five cases of more than 62,000 yuan, and both believed that the evidence was insufficient and did not recognize it.

Therefore, the trial was mainly aimed at two suspected bribery cases totaling 8,000 yuan. The two suspected bribery cases actually originated from three transcripts made by witness Yang at the case handling point, which were formed in the early morning of May 17, 2006, the afternoon of May 17, and the afternoon of May 18, 2006.

In the three transcripts, Yang all stated that he had paid bribes to Nie Xiaohong, which were divided into three: 10,000 yuan, 3,000 yuan, and 5,000 yuan. But in fact, the problem of 10,000 yuan, there is a specific time and place, the problem of 8,000 yuan, there is no time and place, the story of 10,000 yuan is because the superior leaders visited, Nie Xiaohong and many colleagues went to the field to receive, did not have the time and place to accept bribes, so this problem has been determined by the procuratorate not to be established, thus opening a breakthrough in the review and correction of this case.

Defense lawyer Liu Chang pointed out in court that the three bribes stated by Yang in the record were not gradually confessed in turn, but in the first record, so whether it was a story of 10,000 yuan, or a story of 3,000 yuan and 5,000 yuan, it was produced and fabricated at the same time. Lawyer Chen Ge said in court that of the 18,000 yuan that was said together, 10,000 yuan was caught is false, and there is no need to leave a tail in the back.

At this trial, the witness Yang Mou stated in court that he did not pay bribes, and the record he made at that time was required to copy Yan X's record. Yang mou even said in court that when he was interrogated, someone came to turn off the camera and recording equipment.

Witness Yan X said in court that when he was called, the case-handling personnel lied to him that Yang had confessed that he had borrowed money from Nie Xiaohong, and that he himself did not actually have economic contacts with Nie Xiaohong. In the end, defense lawyers Liu Chang and Chen Ge both found Nie Xiaohong innocent in court. However, the case was not pronounced in court.

It is understood that in the past 10 years, at least 16 NPC deputies and provincial people's congress deputies have continued to pay attention to the case, and even more NPC deputies have reprimanded Song Chenguang for directly interfering in the case at the provincial procuratorial organs' hearing and consultation meeting. Today, 11 months have passed since the retrial was filed on June 8, 2020, and four months after the trial on January 15 this year, but as of press time, the verdict has not yet been pronounced.

Earlier, Nie Xiaohong told reporters: "(I) have reflected and appealed for 15 years, and now this second retrial is not easy to come by, and I firmly believe that the Jiangxi Higher People's Court will definitely make a fair judgment as soon as possible based on facts and evidence to safeguard the dignity of the law." ”

Master Wang Lin "Figure"

According to earlier media reports, in 2005, at a banquet, because others believed in Wang Lin's "miracle" of changing snakes and wine, Nie Xiaohong revealed the secret on the spot. After Wang Lin learned of this move, he immediately resented and called Nie Xiaohong to warn him.

Later, with the cooperation of Song Chenguang, then secretary of the Yichun Municipal PARTY Committee, who was closely related to Wang Linguo, on May 19, 2006, without going through any formalities, Nie Xiaohong was restricted from his personal freedom and taken to a case handling point for interrogation, and 28 days later, on June 17, Nie Xiaohong was filed for investigation.

In this public trial, Nie Xiaohong's defense lawyer Liu Chang pointed out in court that these 28 days were undoubtedly illegal detention, and the 8 transcripts formed at this stage can confirm the existence of all-night fatigue interrogations from the time of questioning, which according to the law is also a situation in which confessions are extorted by torture.

During the trial, the witnesses and Nie Xiaohong himself, in addition to condemning Song Chenguang's director and concocting the case, also mentioned many rare circumstances: While Nie Xiaohong was serving his sentence, the Yichun Municipal Commission for Discipline Inspection resolutely opposed Song Chenguang's instructions and did not "double open" Nie Xiaohong; after the Yichun Intermediate People's Court reviewed the collegial panel's "acquittal review" report, court president Pan Donghua risked "stealing" the secret of innocence and forwarding it to Nie Xiaohong's relatives before his death (the media had investigated the matter and confirmed the existence of the above-mentioned review report).

In August 2019, this newspaper reported the case in detail under the title of "The Secret of Snakes and Wine: Master Wang Lin Retaliates the Secret Revealer with "Official Magic"".

A NPC deputy who observed the case told this reporter that through the trial and through the narration of 11 witnesses, the specific situation in which Song Chenguang used his power to bully the law and blatantly forced the investigators of the original case to handle cases illegally, illegally collect evidence, and illegally detain them was exposed.

(Editor: Meng Qingwei Proofreader: Yan Jingning)