■ From August 18 to 20, the Higher People's Court of Jiangxi Province publicly heard the appeal case of Lao Rongzhi suspected of intentional homicide, robbery and kidnapping.
The court announced an adjournment, and the sentencing will be decided at a later date.
■ During the second-instance trial, the appellant Lao Rongzhi, his defender and the procurator who appeared in court fully expressed their opinions on whether Lao Rongzhi constituted intentional homicide, his status and role in the joint crime, and whether the first-instance sentencing was too severe.
Lao Rongzhi made the final statement.
■ During the second trial, Lao Rongzhi overturned his previous confessions many times, trying to "distinguish" himself from Faziying, who had long been under the law.
Chengdu Commercial Daily-Red Star News reporters attended the three-day trial throughout the whole process, and sorted out in detail the focus of the debate between the prosecution and defense in the second instance of the Lao Rongzhi case.
Appeal is Lao Rongzhi's statutory right, and it is the judge's responsibility to judge according to the facts.
The second instance of the case will make the facts of the case clearer and help to further clarify the truth.
The victim's family told reporters that they expected a fair account of the second-instance verdict.
1
"Is the first-instance sentencing too severe?"
Lao Rongzhi and his defenders believe that Faziying raped and beat Lao Rongzhi, and threatened the safety of Lao Rongzhi and his family with the local Lei case. , not the "killer devil" in his mouth.
Lao Rongzhi admitted that she had committed kidnapping and robbery under the coercion of Faziying, but she believed that she was an accomplice. She did not kill or commit intentional homicide.
The first-instance judgment was procedurally inappropriate in many places, there were also errors in the application of the law, and the sentencing was too severe.
The Jiangxi Provincial Procuratorate believes that Lao Rongzhi and others deliberately and illegally deprived the victim of his life, and his behavior constituted the crime of intentional homicide. For the purpose of illegal possession, violence and threats were used to rob the victim's property. His behavior constituted the crime of robbery; The act of kidnapping a victim for the purpose of kidnapping constitutes the crime of kidnapping.
Lao Rongzhi played a major role in the joint crime and was the principal offender, and should be punished according to all the crimes he participated in.
After Lao Rongzhi was brought to justice, he truthfully confessed the fact that he was kidnapped in Changzhou, which was a confession.
Lao Rongzhi intentionally killed five people; robbery caused the death of one person, the amount of robbery was huge, and there was a case of household robbery; kidnapping caused the death of one person and extorted a ransom of more than 70,000 yuan. The consequences and crimes are extremely serious and should be punished according to law.
The first-instance judgment was appropriate and the original judgment should be upheld.
2
"Crimes change or increase"
Lao Rongzhi's defender mentioned in the second instance that the public prosecutor of the first instance only prosecuted Lao Rongzhi for robbery in the Nanchang and Wenzhou cases.
However, in the first-instance judgment, the Nanchang Intermediate Court added the crime of intentional homicide, and did not allow Lao Rongzhi to defend himself against the added crime, and did not reopen the trial.
The prosecution believes that the court of first instance did not increase the charges, but changed the charges.
Robbery, kidnapping, and intentional homicide are all crimes that seriously endanger society. Based on the same facts, the court of first instance first solicited the opinions of Lao Rongzhi's lawyer and the procuratorate, and after reaching a consensus, solicited Lao Rongzhi's opinions through video.
In the first trial, Lao Rongzhi was not inappropriate for robbery and intentional homicide in the Nanchang and Wenzhou cases.
3
"Are Lao Rongzhi and Faziying a couple?"
During the second-instance trial for three consecutive days, the two sides also debated the facts found in the first-instance trial.
In the second-instance trial, Lao Rongzhi denied that he was in a relationship with Faziying.
Lao Rongzhi thinks that his previous boyfriends are all handsome, and he likes people with culture and education, while Faziying is ugly and has no culture.
However, she also mentioned that she and Faziying met in 1994 and only got together at the beginning of 1995. In November 1995, she applied for a leave of absence without pay and Faziying went to Shenzhen, and later returned to Nanchang, where she had been with Fazi before the Nanchang case happened. English break up.
During the Nanchang case, faziying wanted to pull her into the water, so she took her to Xiong's house. After the Nanchang case, because of the crime, she was a girl and became dependent on faziying, but she also hated faziying. "Add to each other" is just an idiom she uses casually, not to love Faziying.
She wanted to escape from faziying during the period, but faziying would threaten the safety of her family.
The prosecution pointed out that Lao Rongzhi's classmates' testimony mentioned that Lao Rongzhi had told her that she had a boyfriend, who was identified as Faziying.
Witnesses such as the landlords of Lao Rongzhi and Faziying in several cases testified that Lao Rongzhi and Faziying lived together in rented rooms in the name of a couple or husband and wife for many times.
When Lao Rongzhi was interrogated, she also said that she had a love-hate relationship with Faziying. Faziying would wash and cook for her after the quarrel. Faziying also taught her to cook. Faziying usually cooks a lot, but they are older. Part of the time I go out to eat stir fry.
4
"Does Faziying destroy and control Lao Rongzhi?"
Lao Rongzhi said that she was tortured and controlled by Faziying both physically and mentally.
Faziying beat her many times, causing her skull to dent with stitches at the corner of her mouth, and she applied for identification; Faziying repeatedly "raped" her, causing her to become pregnant and aborted, and was also violated during miscarriage.
Lao Rongzhi also said that Faziying also threatened and intimidated her with Liu, who had a criminal record, and Lei, a fugitive, and she could only be forced to become Faziying's accomplice.
The prosecutor said that Lao Rongzhi mentioned that she was pregnant with Faziying's child twice, and once was accompanied by sister Faziying's abortion, but there was no record in the hospital, and sister Faziying did not know about her pregnancy.
Liu knew Faziying during his sentence, but never met Lao Rongzhi.
Lei is still absconding and does not know Lao Rongzhi.
In fact, when Lao Rongzhi was arrested for interrogation, he was asked if he was afraid that the victim would report her to the police and be arrested. Lao Rongzhi replied that if he was arrested, he would not confess his accomplice or inform him of his whereabouts. The accomplice had already run away.
Lao Rongzhi also confessed that after faziying quarreled with her, she would be nice to her again.
5
"Immortal jumping is still an inherent crime mode"
Lao Rongzhi admitted in court that he and Faziying wanted to extort others by "fairy dancing".
She said that the idea of "fairy dancing" arose before the Nanchang case. There were two times when a man wanted to sleep with her and gave her thousands of yuan, but she did not sleep with the man after she took the money.
Faziying persuaded her to let the man take care of the loss by catching her in bed with the man, and leave the rest to Faziying.
But she believed that she had broken up with Faziying before the Nanchang case, and she was the only one who had the key to the rental house.
Xiong, who is in the air-conditioning business, came to her because she wanted to soak her, and she just wanted to exchange for an air-conditioning in the rental house.
But faziying "falls from the sky" and threatens Xiong with a knife.
Liu Jia in the Changzhou case and Yin in the Hefei case were all looking for her.
Moreover, she sits on the stage to live rather than to find objects. At the request of faziying, she reports the situation of sitting on the stage every day.
In addition, two women were killed in the Wenzhou case, which also proves that she did not seek targets by sitting on the stage, and did not form an inherent mode of committing crimes with Faziying.
The prosecution pointed out that in the four cases, Lao Rongzhi and Faziying conspired, and Lao Rongzhi provided escort services in entertainment venues, identified the target of the crime, and then kidnapped or robbed the victim.
Before committing the crime, the two discussed the location and object of the crime together.
When committing the crime, the two had a clear division of labor. Lao Rongzhi committed crimes such as identifying and seducing the victim, tying the victim, threatening the victim, and stealing property.
In the Wenzhou case, Lao Rongzhi discovered that Liang was wearing a famous watch and handed over a rich boyfriend during his sitting on the stage. After negotiating with Faziying, he decided to rob Liang in the name of renting a house.
In the four cases, Lao Rongzhi first knew the victim, and together with Faziying, he placed the victim in a dangerous place, calling the victim a "monkey". All of them bound the victim and robbed the victim in a way that threatened the other's life. The division of labor was clear and the cooperation was tacit.
6
"Whether involved in bundling the victim"
During the second trial, Lao Rongzhi denied the determination in the first trial that she participated in bundling multiple victims.
She only admitted that she had bound Liu Jia's feet in the Changzhou case with the only survivor, and repeatedly mentioned that she would never touch some female victims.
In the Hefei case, Yin was very thin. After Yin was bound and locked in a cage by Faziying, she could not lift her. Yin put her feet into the bottom of the cage and walked to another room, but she did not touch it.
Lao Rongzhi also mentioned that in the Changzhou case, when Faziying left the rental house and went downstairs to move the car, she was afraid of Liu Jia's escape, and Faziying blamed her and told Liu Jia not to run. Seeing that Liu Jia wanted to break free, she used a vise." fuck him."
The prosecutor pointed out that Lao Rongzhi admitted that she participated in bundling some victims during the interrogation and the first trial, and the details were consistent with the relevant evidence such as the autopsy report of the deceased.
In the Changzhou case, the surviving victim Liu Jia testified that Lao Rongzhi cooperated with Faziying to take out a few wires and tied his hands and feet directly to the chair.
Lao Rongzhi also confessed that before leaving, Faziying told her that if the "monkey" resisted and tried to escape, the "monkey" would be strangled to death. Tighten Liu Jia's neck with a wire.
7
"Whether to buy a refrigerator, a writing note"
The first-instance judgment shows that in the Hefei case, after Yin was bound, Faziying forced Yin to deliver the property as soon as possible, and Faziying threatened Yin with murder in person.
At noon, Lao Rongzhi bought an old freezer to store the corpse.
After Lu Mou died, Yin Mou still wrote two notes at the request of Lao Rongzhi and Faziying, explaining that his wife must cooperate, saying that the other party was a professional kidnapper who had killed a person in person.
During the second trial, Lao Rongzhi argued that she "doesn't remember buying a refrigerator and writing small words on the note".
She said that faziying likes to go to the bath center, and it may be a refrigerator that faziying asked other women to buy.
Lao Rongzhi and his defender pointed out that the three witnesses had different descriptions of the time when Lao Rongzhi bought the refrigerator, the appearance characteristics and age of the woman who bought the freezer. At this stage, the above-mentioned witnesses were not organized to identify Lao Rongzhi.
The prosecution pointed out that the receipt of the purchase of the refrigerator, the testimony of the owner of the thrift store, the driver of the tricycle and other witnesses can all prove that Lao Rongzhi purchased the refrigerator in this case.
According to the handwriting identification, Yin wrote to his wife on the note, "I will die if I lose a penny." "Don't let anyone know about this matter, whether your mother or someone else, put down the phone now, within fifteen minutes." The supplementary words such as "within the specified time" and "his accomplices will surely make me die faster than the person just now" are in Lao Rongzhi's handwriting.
8
"Who killed Yin Mou?"
The judgment of the Faziying Hefei case shows that the victim of the Hefei case, Yin, was strangled to death by Faziying at 10 am on July 23, 1999.
In the first-instance judgment of the Lao Rongzhi case, Faziying was arrested at Yin's house on the morning of the 23rd.
On the 28th, the police found the bodies of Yin and Lu in the rental house, and Yin was strangled to death.
Lao Rongzhi said that after learning that Lu Mou died, she packed two pieces of clothes in her carry-on bag, and left on the evening of the 22nd to escape from Faziying. She did not know that Yin Mou had been killed later.
Lao Rongzhi's defender believes that the judgment of the Hefei case has determined that Yin was killed by Faziying, and that the method of death by strangulation and suffocation was consistent with the cause of death of other victims other than Lu, which was commonly used by Faziying. method of killing.
The prosecutor pointed out that although the judgment in the Hefei case found that Faziying strangled Yin to death, according to the time of Yin's death in the autopsy report, Faziying had been arrested.
This case has a long history, and based on the principle of "favoring the defendant", the court of first instance in the Lao Rongzhi case neither determined that Yin was killed by Faziying, nor that it was killed by Lao Rongzhi.
But as Lao Rongzhi said in the first-instance trial, "it's not me, it's him", no one else is involved in the case, no matter who among them killed Yin, both of them should bear criminal responsibility for Yin's death.
9
"Changzhou case surrendered or confessed"
Lao Rongzhi's defender proposed that the first instance found that Lao Rongzhi committed the crime in 4 places and was sentenced to 3 death sentences, which is one more crime in the Changzhou case than Faziying.
The case-handling authority did not grasp the facts of the crime, but Lao Rongzhi voluntarily explained it. The Hefei case was not clarified or prosecuted in the original judgment. Lao Rongzhi voluntarily confessed that what the case-handling authority had not grasped was surrendered.
The prosecutors believed that Faziying had already confessed the facts of the crime in Changzhou in her confession, but it was not transferred for review and prosecution due to insufficient evidence.
Because the facts of the crime in Changzhou have been grasped by the judicial organs, after Lao Rongzhi was brought to justice, he truthfully confessed the same crime, which should be regarded as a confession.
10
"Whether the proceeds of the robbery are jointly administered"
Lao Rongzhi proposed that Faziying put the famous watches and other properties stolen in the Nanchang case into Faziying's mother's house, and she handed over all the money she took to the stage to Faziying, and all the stolen properties were controlled by Faziying, and Faziying would not let her Choose a bed sheet that you like, and don't let her carry more than 100 yuan.
The prosecution pointed out that the robbery was under the joint control of Lao Rongzhi and Faziying.
Lao Rongzhi said in court that she and Faziying went to Guangxi, Hangzhou, Leshan, Chongqing, Wuhu and other places. When in Chongqing, Faziying liked to gamble, but she liked to watch TV series at home, and the escaped life was "very happy" , but can't keep in touch with the family.
11
"Whether Lao Rongzhi's behavior constitutes intentional homicide"
Lao Rongzhi said that in the first three cases, she did not know that Faziying murdered. After being arrested in Xiamen, she learned that in addition to Lu Mou's death, six other people died in the case.
She did not kill, and the crime was coerced by Faziying. She was only an accomplice and did not constitute intentional homicide.
Lao Rongzhi's defender pointed out that the lack of knowledge and consent to the death of the victim was all acts committed by Faziying alone, and it was an overreach.
For the intentional homicide that Lao Rongzhi did not participate in, the first-instance trial presumed that she should have known and sentenced her to bear criminal responsibility for the victim's death, which is inappropriate.
After Lao Rongzhi left Faziying, although he fled for more than 20 years, he did not have any illegal or criminal acts, did not cause social harm, and did not belong to a heinous crime and must be executed.
The prosecutors believe that Lao Rongzhi and Faziying conspired to commit robbery and kidnapping, which objectively needed to be carried out by means of violence and coercion, including methods of causing death.
Lao Rongzhi and Faziying jointly committed the crime. Among them, Lao Rongzhi participated in the conspiracy, sought out and lured the victim, bound the victim and robbed the victim's property when Faziying threatened the victim with a knife.
In the Nanchang case, Lao Rongzhi confessed that "the house was set on fire", "I vaguely knew that Faziying might have killed someone", and "Faziying left the aftermath, which meant preventing Xiong's old grandmother from calling the police."
In the Wenzhou case, Lao Rongzhi confessed, "I don't know what will happen to the girl and mommy in the end, as long as Faziying is safe, because I can't take care of others", "We tacitly understand", "We just have a different division of labor, and the main act of murder is It was done by Faziying."
In the Hefei case, Lao Rongzhi confessed, "I knew that Faziying wanted to kill someone to buy a freezer for Yin to contain the body", and added on the note, "If I lose a penny, I will die." "His accomplice will definitely let me Died faster than that person just now" and so on.
The two have a clear division of labor and cooperate with each other, and should jointly take responsibility for the consequences of causing death.
Lao Rongzhi and Faziying robbed and kidnapped the victim. Although he did not directly commit the murder, he knew or should have known that Faziying might commit the murder, and he assisted when Faziying killed Lu Mou.
Therefore, Lao Rongzhi should bear criminal responsibility for the consequences of causing the deaths of 7 people according to law.
Chengdu Business Daily-Red Star News reporter Chen Qingyuan and Cai Xiaoyi from Nanchang, Jiangxi